Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For one thing, "motion" is relative and, for another, we are dealing with abstracts in this context. Look again, carefully, at what I was saying:
Notice: If X moves around, its identity "moves with it" ... So even if "identity" moved, it would move in sync with the self, which is to say, it would not "move" at all, relative to the self. And since, in this context, the self is the only thing, relative to which, movement would matter, the identity does not "move."
And then I add: (Technically, "identity" - as such - is not the sort of thing that "moves".) That is because, in this context, 'identity' is being treated more or less like a property - aka, a universal. All triangles have the property of "having 3 sides." Suppose I cut out 2 paper triangles and place them on my desk. I move one of them around on the desk, but leave the other one alone. The property "having 3 sides" is shared by both triangles. So, in this case, does the property "having 3 sides" move, or not? The answer could be "neither and both" or, better yet, the question is misguided. The property "having 3 sides" is not a "thing" of the sort that can "move." It neither moves, nor does it not-move. The concept of "move" just doesn't apply here.
Each of us is identical to ourself. I am identical to me; you are identical to you. If I move and you do not, does "identity" move? I say it is an ill-conceived question. But if, for some weird reason, we really wanted to insist on applying the concept of motion, then I've have to say that my identity "moves with me." It's not the sort of thing I can loose in my couch cushions, or swap with another person like Pokémon trading cards. That is why I was referencing these aphorisms: "Wherever you go, there you are!" and "You can't run away from yourself!" etc.
In the final sentence I mention "being" - which I was using essentially like "identity" in this case. I guess if we really wanted to, we could get into a discussion of Heidegger's distinction between "Being" and "beings" and his claim that Being is not a being. But a word of warning: Don't make me have to go there.
And just so the central point is not entirely lost: The reason this little detour came up in the first place is that it plays a role in the larger context of me claiming that current science cannot explain the subjective qualitative aspects of consciousness because current science depends on abstract/quantitative/objective concepts, whereas the subjective qualitative aspect of consciousness are not abstract or merely quantitative. I'm not absolutely insisting that no future science can ever make any progress on this; I'm simply saying that, in order to make some progress on this front, we will need at least one paradigm shift concerning what counts as "scientific" data. To me this seems like a fairly safe, conservative bet.
thanks,
Your being doesn't move with respect to you because you and it are the same thing. Saying they are different is like saying "running" and "legs" are different. legs, run. Your body is you. what you are implying is the energy in that location is the energy at that location. I would change how I say it to "The energy transformation in the volume I call "you" are you everywhere they are taking place."
"having three sides" is a descriptor of the object being referenced. The triangle did move, the other triangle did not. The descriptor "moving" has no meaning so treating something that has no meaning in that context isn't relevant to moving. Its like someone saying "george washington" in the middle solving 25/2 in long hand. Then someone defending george was the football player or the guy I knew. Its not relevant to solving the hard problem of 25/2 to the best of our ability.
yes, the central point i am trying to tell you is that we do not know "molecule langue". We don't know what information is being passed along in the state changes in the brain. Witch is actually the information being transferred by the energy transformation is that volume I call you.
I don't think you can separate the act of running from legs. I break the leg and running goes away.
I only half agree with you about understanding "awareness". i am as certain as you, that we can, and probably will decode "brain molecule langue" and know what it is to be you. But, I am with you in stating that ... I am certain that we will never separate "running" from "legs" or you-ing from your body. Legs run, your body is you. When we take you apart there is no "you", because you are a series, a confluence, of events. Not a thing.
Why must you always refer back to me instead of my views? I practiced martial arts and Buddhism many years before my experience. I had tested and rejected most of the hocus pocus and bunkum that accompanied those practices while appreciating the discipline and effectiveness of the practices themselves. Once I had my experience, everything changed. My quest to explain to my intellect how God could exist using science removed more and more of the magic and hokum from my views. I do not write off the accumulated wisdom of eastern practices simply because their explanations are not based on science. They are still effective and that trumps any explanations. Now that I know your perspective as a Chasidic, I respect your discipline and zeal for God. I will still condemn any and all barbaric practices and non-loving actions or treatment of others for ANY reason, but I respect your dedication to God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
which form of martial arts? you still haven't said.
What is your obsession with my personal life??? Off-topic! I began with Judo and Jujitsu then added Kempo Karate and Taekwondo.
... I practiced martial arts and Buddhism many years before my experience. I had tested and rejected most of the hocus pocus and bunkum that accompanied those practices while appreciating the discipline and effectiveness of the practices themselves. Once I had my experience, everything changed.
i am stating the obvious here: if it worked, and if it is effective, then it's not "hocus pocus"
are you aware of how irrational that logic sounds?
the "effectiveness of these practices" is what led to your pivotal life changing event.
so they can't be "bunkum."
again, are you aware of how irrational this sounds?
a person finds that a practice works and is effective in their own personal experience. here are some possible reactions.
possible reaction #1 "that practice works and is effective. there must be something to it. i don't know how but boy it sure works.
possible reaction #2 "that practice works and is effective. there must be something to it. i'm interested in learning more about how it works"
possible reactions #3 "that practice works and is effective. it is nonsense and hocus pocus."
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 04-12-2018 at 10:44 PM..
I am stating the obvious here: if it worked, and if it is effective, then it's not "hocus pocus"
are you aware of how irrational that logic sounds?
the "effectiveness of these practices" is what led to your pivotal life-changing event.
so they can't be "bunkum."
again, are you aware of how irrational this sounds? a person finds that a practice works and is effective in their own personal experience. here are some possible reactions.
possible reaction #1 "that practice works and is effective. there must be something to it. I don't know how but boy it sure works.
possible reaction #2 "that practice works and is effective. there must be something to it. I'm interested in learning more about how it works"
possible reactions #3 "that practice works and is effective. it is nonsense and hocus pocus."
You seem to have difficulty separating ideas. Acupuncture works. I have seen its effectiveness on my daughter's Dog. That does NOT mean I believe and accept their theories about WHY or HOW it works. They developed it over centuries of trial and error and they created their own theories about what is going on but there is no evidence or science that explains the concepts or mechanisms they claim are operating. The same is true of another trial and error developed art: astrology. I don't know if there is but there MAY be an impact on human personality based on where and when in the universe (consciousness of God) you are born. However, if there is I am certain it has nothing to do with "planetary emanations" or any of the other claimed nonsense astrologers use to explain it. That is what I mean by the hocus pocus that accompanies these practices.
You seem to have difficulty separating ideas. Acupuncture works. I have seen its effectiveness on my daughter's Dog. That does NOT mean I believe and accept their theories about WHY or HOW it works. They developed it over centuries of trial and error and they created their own theories about what is going on but there is no evidence or science thatexplains the concepts or mechanisms they claim are operating.......
Chinese medicine explains the concepts and mechanisms how acupuncture works.
Clearly and in great detail.
These same concepts and mechanisms are the foundation of many martial arts.
It is explained. It is understood. It is part of nature and how the laws of nature work.
You just don't like the explanation.
Chinese medicine explains the concepts and mechanisms how acupuncture works.
Clearly and in great detail.
These same concepts and mechanisms are the foundation of many martial arts.
It is explained. It is understood.
You just don't like the explanation.
Okay. I don't like the explanations because they are devoid of science. What I accept has to be compatible with and consistent with known science. Their concepts and mechanisms are NOT so they will remain hokum to me. That does NOT mean I will denigrate the practices that are based on them if they are effective, and they are.
Okay. I don't like the explanations because they are devoid of science. What I accept has to be compatible with and consistent with known science. Their concepts and mechanisms are NOT so they will remain hokum to me. That does NOT mean I will denigrate the practices that are based on them if they are effective, and they are.
the explanations are not devoid of science.
what is devoid is your knowledge and understanding of the science, and your understanding of the laws of nature that are utilized by Chinese medicine and some martial arts.
it is known science. Just not known by you.
de·void
entirely lacking
sci·ence
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
branch of knowledge, body of knowledge/information, area of study, discipline, field
a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject.
laws of nature
Scientific generalizations (arrived at by experimentation and/or observation) that try to explain how nature works
a generalized statement of natural processes;
generalizations of science representing an intrinsic orderliness of nature,
the observed regular phenomena which are ultimate data for our knowledge
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 04-13-2018 at 12:00 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
