What is Spirit?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-01-2014, 09:01 PM (This post was last modified: 19-01-2014 09:18 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What is Spirit?
Quote:Lumion
Thus the idea of mystical transcendent God is encountered by many people independently in our history, because they literally experience it.

Wrong. They have experiences, and don't know what else to name it, so they name it that. There is absolutely no proof the naming is correct, or that they are the same experiences. As usual you spout nonsense, and provide no references, and think people are dumb enough to buy your snake oil.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 09:42 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  There may be evidence some types of meditation can increase integration and alter how we perceive,, perhaps enhancing cognition. However this does not infer God is changing anyone’s brain !
Navy Seals training has intensive excercises which increase soldiers awareness and can lead to integration of various cognitive skills – it does not follow that more integration means God is changing anyones brain.
In anycase the brain is changing all the time – sometimes with further integration, sometimes fluctuating to less integration – even in different parts to different extent. From none of this it follows that God is changing anything. (or that God even exists despite a subjective mystical experience)
I don't mean religious God, I mean God as a social, cultural and especially psychological phenomenon. Enlightenment is not just a historical era, it is also a psychological phenomenon that is brought about by some practices. It is not just well-being. The depth of Eastern spiritual meaning is fully reflected in Western Nietzsche's "overman". There is greatness in humanity and this greatness I refer to, this greatness I can subjectively contact and other more capable individuals are capable of manifesting it visibly. I perhaps only stand out in being able to study this greatness in detail, while others just do what they will, without analyzing it. However, even I have just a vague idea what is the brain's part to play at this supreme human function. It is not just some ability. There are prodigies with inborn abilities who do not have to go through any mystical experience in order to gain it. There is a subjective experience of divinity or greatness that happens to people whether they can benefit from it outwardly, or not.


(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  (Today 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote: However, your insistence that the brain be human is entirely anthropocentric. What about non-humans? What about aliens?
Or are you insisting that only a biological brain can support or host a person? Are we back to élan vital, for which there is no evidence?
We will cross that bridge when we get to it. However, my preliminary guess is, that truly living sentient beings would be able to describe the universal properties of reality. A robot would describe the world in terms of Boolean algebra, which would clearly mean that this being does not run on the same natural reality with us.

As for élan vital, I still think it is just electricity. The question however is, what is electricity. I mean, when we take away the medium, such as ions or electrons. The definitions I've seen so far are rather circular or just descriptive. Here the physics textbook would help, but it seems to me the usual descriptions are terribly intra-paradigmatic, that is, not philosophical or universal at all.

(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  See my intro about universals and what you even mean by “contacting outside reality” Aristotle & Bertrand Russell et al make much more sense & in harmony with neuroscience and cognitive psychology than Plato or Descartes.
This would take more detailed discussion. I work with two models, one is more Aristotelian, one is sort of Platonic. Reconciling them is not easy. Not without knowing exactly what you mean. I search for statements which are true in multiple paradigms, and it is hell of a difficult job.

I think simultaneously in two basic paradigms (less or more, depending on a topic...) - one is obligatory but limited, the other is much broader but non-obligatory, I mean, as far as you or scientists are concerned, not me, for me it is obligatory for experiential reasons.

(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  If the material substrate itself had enough complexity & the right way to organize it then no reason why cannot be sentient – it would be a process and not frozen
Aye. And what anything must be or have, in order to be a process? Energy.

(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  What does that even mean, sounds woo woo.
Study physics or you are equivocating energy with consciousness and using the term in a way that is not normally used (at least in physics)
Sometimes I do not speak as a physicist, sometimes I do, I shift perspectives (and keep track of it, don't worry).
I can't see any fundamental difference between energy in brain, such as electric potential of neurons, and any other electricity in the universe. There is no élan vital but energy flowing through all forms, particularly electricity. Is there any reason to distinguish consciousness and energy? We know that consciousness is not form-dependent, that is, we do not speak of neurons, we do not perceive our neurons. We perceive the fundamentals of reality, or perhaps properties of energy itself.

(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  Our minds ore localized & no reason to suggest they are contacting other realms. Vast amounts of research into ESP & Remote viewing fail to replicate results and rely on anecdotal claims that cannot be substantiated when the subject is asked to demonstrate.
ESP as you know the term is unreliable. There's no point in researching it objectively, it is not something that gives objective information, even if it was real in some sense.

(19-01-2014 05:31 PM)Baruch Wrote:  No need to explain genius or great historical manner in some magical mystical way – some people are better at some skills. Kurt Godel was better at Maths, Beethoven in Music, Galileo in formulating experiments & scientific observations etc. No need for them to get this information from spirits, gods or holy ghosts. There is natural variation in peoples cognitive skills – consider a model like the 7 intelligences of Howard Gardener.
o 1.1 Musical–rhythmic & harmonic
o 1.2 Visual–spatial
o 1.3 Verbal–linguistic
o 1.4 Logical–mathematical
o 1.5 Bodily–kinesthetic
o 1.6 Interpersonal
I wouldn't call Gardener's model an explanation, simply a classification of output. Also, an explanation is a paradigmatic term, something that is extra-paradigmatic has no explanation except philosophical. If intelligences are extra-paradigmatic, then we're screwed. That would be the case if intelligence was transcendent, that is, if its physical nature was energy (which I equated with consciousness), and form that is completely subject to the energy.
I know this statement is not easy to comprehend, but I erased some barriers and found some parallels, so I consider it a success. Now the question basically is, the brain of a genius or philosopher, what difference does it have to a normal guy's brain? What different electric properties does it have? I mean the structure of neurons, is it denser connected or sparser? Is there a way to measure a degree of brain integration and non-pathological brain activity? Does a philosopher have a greater control over his own brain and endocrine system?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:07 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 09:01 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Wrong. They have experiences, and don't know what else to name it, so they name it that. There is absolutely no proof the naming is correct, or that they are the same experiences. As usual you spout nonsense, and provide no references, and think people are dumb enough to buy your snake oil.
Here you have no choice but to give yourself up into the qualitative research methods of sociology and trust the researchers that they are capable to extract a universal description of the experience with high validity and reliability.
As someone who went through the experience, I can say they did a good job. Last time I heard, some Buddhist qualitative descriptions were even usable in neurological research.

And it would be two N, please. One I, two N.

(19-01-2014 08:44 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  It's dangerous if you do it wrong. Meaning if you are already batshit crazy and you sit there and let your mind run wild.

Done right, one quietens the mental monkey chatter/white noise and gives one a sense of inner equilibrium. It's mental training.
Yeah. Truth be told, I've never done a straight & plain meditation, but some more exotic kinds, like Laya Yoga. I got some practice of the quiet parts, but the purpose is to get lighted up like a Christmas tree, without burning up. And that is quite a work too. I dare to say it is even more dangerous than letting the mind run wild, this is some direct messing with endocrine and nerve system.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:29 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 10:07 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Yeah. Truth be told, I've never done a straight & plain meditation, but some more exotic kinds, like Laya Yoga. I got some practice of the quiet parts, but the purpose is to get lighted up like a Christmas tree, without burning up. And that is quite a work too. I dare to say it is even more dangerous than letting the mind run wild, this is some direct messing with endocrine and nerve system.

In other words, total woo.

Quote:I don't mean religious God, I mean God as a social, cultural and especially psychological phenomenon.


Translation: imaginary woo bullshit.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:36 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 10:29 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 10:07 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Yeah. Truth be told, I've never done a straight & plain meditation, but some more exotic kinds, like Laya Yoga. I got some practice of the quiet parts, but the purpose is to get lighted up like a Christmas tree, without burning up. And that is quite a work too. I dare to say it is even more dangerous than letting the mind run wild, this is some direct messing with endocrine and nerve system.

In other words, total woo.

Quote:I don't mean religious God, I mean God as a social, cultural and especially psychological phenomenon.


Translation: imaginary woo bullshit.



Except for witches. Witches are totally wonderful.Evil_monster
*snort* Did you hug your witch today?Heart

But it's only cause most of the old-school sort just don't buy into the woo-ness of it all. What we do is carry a walking knowledge of what two herbs mixed together can drop a camel at 50 paces. That stuff just comes in handy. *snort*


buwwaaahaaa

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WitchSabrina's post
19-01-2014, 10:39 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 11:21 AM)Baruch Wrote:  (In Islamic theology jinn are said to be creatures with free will, made from smokeless fire by Allah) - obviously !

Smokeless fire? So, it's magical fire then? Magically shaking atoms that aren't really there? Consider

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:43 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 10:36 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 10:29 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  In other words, total woo.



Translation: imaginary woo bullshit.



Except for witches. Witches are totally wonderful.Evil_monster
*snort* Did you hug your witch today?Heart

But it's only cause most of the old-school sort just don't buy into the woo-ness of it all. What we do is carry a walking knowledge of what two herbs mixed together can drop a camel at 50 paces. That stuff just comes in handy. *snort*


buwwaaahaaa

Hey, I can do that, too! (See: "Green Dragon", heh).


Does that make me a witch too?

Big Grin

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
19-01-2014, 10:51 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 10:43 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 10:36 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  Except for witches. Witches are totally wonderful.Evil_monster
*snort* Did you hug your witch today?Heart

But it's only cause most of the old-school sort just don't buy into the woo-ness of it all. What we do is carry a walking knowledge of what two herbs mixed together can drop a camel at 50 paces. That stuff just comes in handy. *snort*


buwwaaahaaa

Hey, I can do that, too! (See: "Green Dragon", heh).


Does that make me a witch too?

Big Grin

Aww shit......... I was saving that for your Birthday.
Tongue

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WitchSabrina's post
19-01-2014, 11:35 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  That would be an interesting cultural exchange.
What do you mean, a real physics textbook? I've had 4 years of electrotechnics and high school physics. Do you have any specific book in mind?

I'll recommend you the same books I always start by recommending: A Brief History of Time and The Universe in A Nutshell by Stephen Hawking and A Cultural History of Physics by Karoli Simonyi.

You have made it clear, in the past, that you do not understand the physics which would by necessity underlie the woo you're talking about. Electromagnetic field theory, of course, being the most obvious, but you do also throw around words like 'dark matter' like they're going out of style...

(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Anyway, I think you underestimate me, as people tend to underestimate everything they don't understand.

No such thing. I have merely told you that you are (repeatedly) misusing and bungling physical concepts. It would be underestimating you to say that I didn't think you could learn the actual physics, and I have never said any such thing. I have encouraged you to learn some scientific background, in order that actual communication be rendered possible.

It is not for other people to magically divine what you have going on in your head. That is not how scientific literature works. It is incumbent on you to explain yourself. Part of doing so is learning, to all necessary detail, the reality behind the concepts whereof you speak so blithely. What you continuously do is say something like "it is like [insert known physical phenomenon X], and it behaves as [insert behaviour utterly incompatible with known physical phenomenon X]".

(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  You told me that weakly interacting particles use weak nuclear force, that's the only useful information I got from you.

Because that is true literally by definition.

If you are using the term to refer to something else then you are wrong. I don't care if you have to make up the terminology; incoherently misappropriating existing vocabulary helps no one.

(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I think the problem is not in my lack of physics, but in your inability to listen and suspend judgement until you learn enough of my terminology or language so that it starts making sense. You think that your language and point of view is the only valid one there can be, so you are not motivated to learn anything else.

Sorry, but you don't get to make such bullshit declarations.

If you don't know what you're talking about, how am I supposed to?

It is not "my" language and terminology. It is that of the entirety of modern science, admitting of an emphasis on physics but not so confined; the cumulative work of innumerable people over literally centuries of refinement.

One schmuck on a forum doesn't get to redefine "electromagnetic" however and whenever he wants. Sorry.

(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I seek parallels between multiple systems of interpreting reality and it takes its toll on precision - I know that. However that is necessary, because many concepts I work with have no equivalent in today's science, or just imperfect equivalent or there is an equivalent and I don't know what it is, in which case you could be helpful if you knew what I mean.

It is not my job to explain your ideas; that is your job.

You are not using the scientific terms in "imperfectly equivalent" ways. You use them in incoherent and impossible ways. As soon as you say something like "dark matter" then I am thinking in terms of dark matter. Therefore to speak, as you have repeatedly despite my corrections, of dark matter plasma, is nonsensical.

If you request of me a sculpture depicting a perfect sphere with six vertices then it is not my fault that I cannot produce such a thing.

(19-01-2014 07:46 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 06:01 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Not legitimate peer-reviewed articles, hmm? I wonder why...
Peer reviewed by whom? If you think these people are quacks, then their peers will be...what? Quacks. So who or what is a peer?

Fatuity is not becoming, you know. And you likewise know perfectly well I meant mainstream academic literature.

At which point I reiterate:
'lol conspiracy' is not an answer

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
19-01-2014, 11:42 PM
RE: What is Spirit?
(19-01-2014 10:07 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Here you have no choice but to give yourself up into the qualitative research methods of sociology and trust the researchers that they are capable to extract a universal description of the experience with high validity and reliability.
As someone who went through the experience, I can say they did a good job. Last time I heard, some Buddhist qualitative descriptions were even usable in neurological research.

And perfectly true to form, you fail to mention even one source or reference. So Woomeister actually is so stupid that he thinks people on an atheist forum are gonna buy that shit with no references. OMF'nG. I have a lot of choices. NONE of them involve giving myself up to your crapola. As usual you MISS the point. A description of an experience does not prove the experience is true. All it proves is they name the same woo consistently, as woo. You really are sad. Please point me to the neurological research, Woomeister.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: