We don't know if consciousness is physical, Period.

[AgnosticBoy]

On another thread, one member stated the following regarding consciousness:

Where you are begging the question is when you assume that the mind (i e. Something immaterial) is responsible for that, when the brain (network of neurons plugged to stimulus from the outside world + a bunch of accidents of evolution) can perfectly be pointed as the source of those behavior.

Before assuming something immaterial is responsible for a phenomenon, starts by proving something immaterial exist to begin with.

Not only am I skeptical of this claim, which is a common claim made by atheists, but I also get annoyed by the level of confidence that people have in the above claim. If the researchers that study consciousness acknowledge that it presents a 'hard problem', then why should I believe any claims that explain consciousness as being physical? In my view, there are good reasons to doubt that consciousness is material or physical. The way I look at it is that even if consciousness is physical, it is still unlike any other physical phenomenon in the Universe. The main reason for that is that the presence of subjectivity. As it stands, subjective experiences can only be observed by the subject. Also, they are not measurable nor observable from the third-person point-of-view. Don't all of those characteristics sound familiar to some thing else? Immaterial or non-physical (also being unobservable, not measurable, etc.)?

Please debate:
1. Is it arrogant to claim that consciousness is physical?
2. Are there good reasons to doubt that it is physical? Or do you agree with the point from the post I quoted at the beginning of this post?

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Swami in post #150]

No one likes it when the shoe is on the other foot. Like Joey, I pressure the materialist for evidence. We only have a promissary note so far that consciousness will be explained by science. Every credible scientist will tell you that there is no scientific theory of consciousness. Those that go in arrogant eventually come back humbled.

OK ... let's put the shoe on the other foot. Materialists acknowledge that consciousness is not a solved problem, but can present decades of valid research that (so far) converges towards the basic idea that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain. There are thousands of published papers and hundreds of books that cumulatively point in that direction. The simple, universal observation that consciousness exists in animals with brains and doesn't seem to exist in anything without a working brain, supports all of this research.

Non-materialists, on the other hand, claim that consciousness is some mysterious "thing" that can only be defined amorphously and can only be explained by mysticism or related kinds of arguments. Please give us a nonscientific theory of consciousness since you claim no scientific theory exists, and explain why this should be believed over the simple materialist claim (inferred from observations) that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain.

[Swami]

Non-materialists, on the other hand, claim that consciousness is some mysterious "thing" that can only be defined amorphously and can only be explained by mysticism or related kinds of arguments. Please give us a nonscientific theory of consciousness since you claim no scientific theory exists, and explain why this should be believed over the simple materialist claim (inferred from observations) that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain.

Suppose one day you wake up, and you notice that you have no sense of self. You feel loose and boundless as if you can be part of everything. Either you conclude that you are having a depersonalization disorder. You can also conclude that you had one of the most profound experiences that someone can have in this lifetime. This all depends on the circumstances.

Linda's first-hand report from Yoga International:

I was home alone, walking through the living room, not thinking of anything in particular, when suddenly my consciousness erupted. It no longer ended at the surface of my body but expanded outward, filling the surrounding space. I experienced everything around me as inside me and absolutely identical to myself. I was no longer Linda Johnsen; I was everything. The bliss of that single moment was beyond description.

It wasn't as if I was the universe. I really was the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed.

These experiences have all been part of a tradition that has existed for thousands of years. The mystics tell us pathway is none other than discovering consciousness in its pure form.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791389/

As already mentioned, under normal conditions, pure consciousness is only reflected in the intellect and not recognized. Gaining access to pure consciousness and dwelling therein is, in fact, the highest aim in the system of Yoga (to see reality as it is),

The result of having gained access to pure consciousness and dwelling therein is known in the literature as, for instance, “enlightenment” or “realization.” And consequently, the Yoga system also has a procedure for reaching that desirable state.
Only if the fluctuations of the mind can be brought to a standstill will the connection between intellect and pure consciousness become strong enough to achieve the desired access and enable the yogi to dwell in pure consciousness 5.

On the way to attaining freedom, the yogi may (as in the Buddhist path) acquire several kinds of extraordinary cognitions (siddhis) when the last three steps mentioned above are applied in certain ways and to certain objects (see third book of the Yogasutras; see also Braud, 2008). Examples are knowledge of the past and future, clairvoyance, clairaudience, psychokinesis, and telepathy. But the ultimate aim of developing extraordinary cognition is (as in Buddhist approaches), liberation or enlightenment, which can be described in Samkhya-Yoga as gaining unobstructed access to and then dwelling in pure consciousness, without any further reincarnation.

You are also in error about what science is. Everything I am telling you is Science. Mystics have also inferred from their observations and use field research. You don't need technology and a lab to do science. The real problem is you don't like their observations.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Swami in post #152]

The real problem is you don't like their observations.

It has nothing to do with liking or not liking their observations, but in whether the conclusions they derive from those observations have any merit. Timothy Leary argued that LSD was a pathway to experiencing true consiousness ... was he right? Others claim psilocybin is the ticket, while others argue that meditation can do it. What is someone supposed to take from Linda's comment:

It wasn't as if I was the universe. I really was the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed.

Was she high? What does "I was the universe" even mean? This sounds like jibberish and not anything you'd call "research" any more than the story of someone who claimed they'd been abducted by aliens and described in detail what they experienced. Is this person named Linda rejecting materialism because of her few seconds of "being the universe" meant to be taken seriously, and considered a valid research observation?

[boatsnguitars]

Non-materialists, on the other hand, claim that consciousness is some mysterious "thing" that can only be defined amorphously and can only be explained by mysticism or related kinds of arguments. Please give us a nonscientific theory of consciousness since you claim no scientific theory exists, and explain why this should be believed over the simple materialist claim (inferred from observations) that consciousness is an emergent property of a working brain.

Suppose one day you wake up, and you notice that you have no sense of self. You feel loose and boundless as if you can be part of everything. Either you conclude that you are having a depersonalization disorder. You can also conclude that you had one of the most profound experiences that someone can have in this lifetime. This all depends on the circumstances.

Linda's first-hand report from Yoga International:

I was home alone, walking through the living room, not thinking of anything in particular, when suddenly my consciousness erupted. It no longer ended at the surface of my body but expanded outward, filling the surrounding space. I experienced everything around me as inside me and absolutely identical to myself. I was no longer Linda Johnsen; I was everything. The bliss of that single moment was beyond description.

It wasn't as if I was the universe. I really was the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed.

These experiences have all been part of a tradition that has existed for thousands of years. The mystics tell us pathway is none other than discovering consciousness in its pure form.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791389/

As already mentioned, under normal conditions, pure consciousness is only reflected in the intellect and not recognized. Gaining access to pure consciousness and dwelling therein is, in fact, the highest aim in the system of Yoga (to see reality as it is),

The result of having gained access to pure consciousness and dwelling therein is known in the literature as, for instance, “enlightenment” or “realization.” And consequently, the Yoga system also has a procedure for reaching that desirable state.
Only if the fluctuations of the mind can be brought to a standstill will the connection between intellect and pure consciousness become strong enough to achieve the desired access and enable the yogi to dwell in pure consciousness 5.

On the way to attaining freedom, the yogi may (as in the Buddhist path) acquire several kinds of extraordinary cognitions (siddhis) when the last three steps mentioned above are applied in certain ways and to certain objects (see third book of the Yogasutras; see also Braud, 2008). Examples are knowledge of the past and future, clairvoyance, clairaudience, psychokinesis, and telepathy. But the ultimate aim of developing extraordinary cognition is (as in Buddhist approaches), liberation or enlightenment, which can be described in Samkhya-Yoga as gaining unobstructed access to and then dwelling in pure consciousness, without any further reincarnation.

You are also in error about what science is. Everything I am telling you is Science. Mystics have also inferred from their observations and use field research. You don't need technology and a lab to do science. The real problem is you don't like their observations.

No body discounts that people claim to see ghosts or feel they are part of the universe - the issue is whether there are ghosts, or that they actually
entered the universe and the universe entered them'.

The sad fact is, after all these experiences of knowing the universe, these people don't come to us with any wisdom that would help. They don't solve conflicts, they don't cure cancer, they don't warn of coming storms, etc.

It appears, by all accounts, these people can feel something that isn't true.

[Swami]

DrNoGods: It has nothing to do with liking or not liking their observations, but in whether the conclusions they derive from those observations have any merit. Timothy Leary argued that LSD was a pathway to experiencing true consiousness ... was he right? Others claim psilocybin is the ticket, while others argue that meditation can do it.

Swami responds: There are different paths just as they are different religions. They are all true on different levels. Science is also part of the path but it is the farthest away from knowing reality as it is. There are scientists that are humble enough to give religion and spirituality a chance.

DrNoGods: What is someone supposed to take from Linda's comment:

It wasn't as if I was the universe. I really was the universe. It happened spontaneously, and even though it only lasted a few seconds, I emerged from it changed forever. Any confidence I had in the materialistic scientific paradigm collapsed.

Was she high? What does "I was the universe" even mean?

Swami responds: You are taking the experience for granted. We can relate to our sense of self being where our body is. We all experience that connection. Everything outside of the body is seen as separate from us. Being one with the Universe means that you do not have a separation with anything. You sense of self is not limited to any one body or object. It is from this experience and others that many mystics have concluded that all is one.

DrNoGods: This sounds like jibberish and not anything you'd call "research" any more than the story of someone who claimed they'd been abducted by aliens and described in detail what they experienced. Is this person named Linda rejecting materialism because of her few seconds of "being the universe" meant to be taken seriously, and considered a valid research observation?


Swami responds: You are thinking like a lab scientist again. Consider looking at this experience as part of field research. A field researcher would ask how can it be experienced. He would record information even if it was anecdotal. The near-death experience was at first dismissed by science. It took field researchers documenting the experiences, finding patterns, and more. Now the nde research is highly respected. Very few scientists today question that the experience occurs.

[Swami]

boatsnguitars: No body discounts that people claim to see ghosts or feel they are part of the universe - the issue is whether there are ghosts, or that they actually entered the universe and the universe entered them'.


Swami responds: Have you ever questioned what you would call ordinary reality? How do you know what is real? Those that have experienced different levels of reality are in a better position to answer that question. The average person, including scientists, choose to only focus on the ordinary and that leaves them with a limited perspective.

boatsnguitarsThe sad fact is, after all these experiences of knowing the universe, these people don't come to us with any wisdom that would help. They don't solve conflicts, they don't cure cancer, they don't warn of coming storms, etc.

It appears, by all accounts, these people can feel something that isn't true.

Swami responds: There are too many examples to list. Perhaps you are being too skeptical.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to brunumb in post #110]

It is something I often type incorrectly. In fact, it is not the only word I make that mistake with that ends in st. I am sure it means that I am retarded.