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.
Just a couple of updates, Gaylen. Transponder changed his name from Arequipa - but it's me . And this is no longer Religion and phiosophy and discusion of science (though not - I gather - referring to it in religion questions) is counter to ToS. Over to you.
Just a couple of updates, Gaylen. Transponder changed his name from Arequipa - but it's me . And this is no longer Religion and phiosophy and discusion of science (though not - I gather - referring to it in religion questions) is counter to ToS. Over to you.
Hopefully I won’t provoke the wrath of a mod!!! I think I’m safe because my references to science and philosophy are essentially focused on defending a perspective that has some deep spiritual implications, and (in a ‘round-about way) addresses the topic of the thread.
I suspect that the “woo-woo” that Matadora is flagging is probably my admittedly odd notion that NDE folks who remember activities after brain death could be picking up on the experiences of doctors and nurses in the room. This would seem to be a variety of telepathy. Which brings me to another of my new “toys” – which I will only touch on briefly here. I’ve recently become greatly impressed by the complexity of cell walls. Cells are far more “intelligent” than most people think, and most of this intelligence stems from the nature of cell walls.
It’s a long story, but for the moment I’ll just focus on one key idea: Because of the nature of cell walls, living cells are impacted by a wide range of energies (and potentially the information packed therein?). I’m basically suggesting that cell walls are mechanisms that help explain the type of holism I referred to in previous posts. (Here is a fairly good reference for what I’m talking about: Tsong, T.Y. (1989). “Deciphering the language of cells.” Trends in Biochemical Sciences 14: 89-92. ( http://ac.els-cdn.com/09680004899012...2d1c063701c077 )
Neurons, of course, are living cells and, thus, their behaviors could be influenced by information contained in many types of energy – some of which might be as-yet unrecognized by current physics. Of course this is all vague and wildly speculative, but it seems to me like a good avenue for future research.
Anyways, I’m playing around with the idea that the “iconic” nature of qualia could be rooted in information flowing into neurons via energies that are currently not well understood. Wittgenstein is famous for his “beetle in a box” metaphor, by which he tried to show that subjective qualitative feelings, insofar as they are “private” cannot be referenced by public language, and ultimately cannot even be “meaningful.” But I want to put a twist on this idea: What if the “box” is, in itself, an icon? In other words, what if the box is essentially shaped like the beetle that it contains? In this ‘round-about way, the “private” qualia would become indirectly publicly accessible. Perhaps we don’t see qualia directly, but the intricate patterns of our neural activity might be, in effect, icons for the “things-in-themselves” qualia.
Presumably, brains would need some fairly high levels of complexity because the information-soaked energy patterns that constitute qualia are, in themselves, highly complex. Brains might, in effect, be icon-makers. Which is to say that they “make the beetle-shaped boxes” that mimic the otherwise private “beetles” (the “raw feels” of qualia).
As you say, speculative but absolutely demands research and testing. And I want to guard against any tendency to try to do a Theist - to force what indications or suggestions - e.g unknown energy (energy is after all just what particles in a particular formation do - not some invisible power that they generate) are made into my Preferred Theory (that evolution hardwired out brains to do particular things which have a survival - advantage effect).
There is the matter of Topic though - Consciousness after death.
Does this idea have any implications for the perpetuation for the mental patterns we call thoughts and mind after the matter of the mind has gone (I don't mean residual mental activity in a clinically dead state that can be perceived after revival, which can also be called "Consciousness after death' and mistaken for 'Eternal (spiritual) life', al of which are linked with the NDE debate?
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-02-2017 at 04:17 AM..
Does this idea have any implications for the perpetuation for the mental patterns we call thoughts and mind after the matter of the mind has gone (I don't mean residual mental activity in a clinically dead state that can be perceived after revival, which can also be called "Consciousness after death' and mistaken for 'Eternal (spiritual) life', al of which are linked with the NDE debate?
The quick answer is yes. I've discussed this idea in excruciating detail over the course of many pages over in the philosophy forum. Here is one example that I think gets at the main points:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
Bottom line (as far as I'm concerned): If/when at any point, for any reason (even by "pure accident"), some key functional aspects of my physical brain (or whatever physical mechanism stores memories) are "re-created" somewhere or somewhen in our universe, or in the infinite multiverse, then "I" will be there just as fully and just as "really" as "I" will (hopefully) wake up tomorrow morning. To put it another way: In whatever sense I am comforted by the idea that "I" will wake up tomorrow, then in that exact same sense, "I" will wake up everywhere and everywhen a brain that, for whatever reason, "has my memories" wakes up anywhere/anywhen in the multiverse. This is a weird concept of "afterlife" that involves a potentially infinite number of "afterlives" of various sorts, but I think that a lot of logic and evidence points to it being true. If you do not find this concept of an afterlife "comforting" because you do not believe that it will "really be" you who wakes up in some other part of the multiverse, then you are comforted by an illusion when you think that you will be the one who wakes up in your bed tomorrow.
Although I've acquired a few new analytic tools and rhetorical strategies along the way, my bottom line idea about "life after death" has not changed. I am, however, adding one new idea in relation to Sam Parnia's NDE research discussed earlier in this thread: I've suggested that the Near Death stories recounted by patients don't really have much to do with the larger concept of "life after death," according to my theory. Basically, NDEs and something like "eternal experience" (let's say "EE" for short) are relatively independent mechanisms in my theory. Confirming NDEs would lend some interesting support for the possibility of EE, and vice versa, but either one could be true without the other being true, insofar as my theory is concerned.
What could potentially connect the NDE and EE mechanisms, of course, is the holistic notion that Reality Itself is, in each and every instance of experience, the one and only "experiencer".
The NDEs, if confirmed, would (according to my theory) suggest that we need to search for some physical mechanism for telepathy - i.e., some mechanism whereby the experiences of the doctors and nurses could somehow affect the neural functioning of the patient's brain. Keep in mind that the neurons in a NDE are still alive, but they are not functioning in anything like the sort of coherent patterns that I believe are necessary for consciousness. The patient's brain is not processing sensory data in any sort of traditional way, so if, in fact, the patient wakes up with information about her surroundings that could only be obtained during the period of her brain death, I'm saying the most plausible explanation is that this information was somehow gathered and processed by other brains during that time, and then somehow becomes manifest in the patient's brain.
Discovering this mechanism for NDE might or might not provided clues about (and/or evidence for) EE because my theory of EE is driven by the physicalist assumption that the "self-centered" perspective associated with the ego is essentially a set of brain processes (not some sort of non-physical "soul" floating around). According to me, EE is possible on the assumption that anywhere and anywhen these brain processes exist, then "I" am there having experiences. So if Reality is "big enough" (either infinite or FAPP infinite), then statistically speaking, the physically limited brain processes constituting my experience X could be re-created many times - or possibly even an infinite number of times.
To account for the types of immortality in which I remember "past lives" (as opposed to an amnesic re-living without realizing I've done all this before), or even "other lives" (e.g., some composite self remembering being me and also being you), we might need something like a mixture of the NDE telepathy mechanism and the statistical logic of physicalist (non-theistic) EE.
Obviously none of this rules out the possibility of a Divine Creator/Universal Mind/God, but I'm arguing that we can plausibly talk about NDEs and EE on purely physicalist grounds - no need for theistic assumptions. Even if we do someday confirm that both NDEs and EE are real, we would still not necessarily have any reason to think that a Divine Creator or all-knowing "God" exists.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 03-02-2017 at 08:30 AM..
The quick answer is yes. I've discussed this idea in excruciating detail over the course of many pages over in the philosophy forum. Here is one example that I think gets at the main points:
Although I've acquired a few new analytic tools and rhetorical strategies along the way, my bottom line idea about "life after death" has not changed. I am, however, adding one new idea in relation to Sam Parnia's NDE research discussed earlier in this thread: I've suggested that the Near Death stories recounted by patients don't really have much to do with the larger concept of "life after death," according to my theory. Basically, NDEs and something like "eternal experience" (let's say "EE" for short) are relatively independent mechanisms in my theory. Confirming NDEs would lend some interesting support for the possibility of EE, and vice versa, but either one could be true without the other being true, insofar as my theory is concerned.
What could potentially connect the NDE and EE mechanisms, of course, is the holistic notion that Reality Itself is, in each and every instance of experience, the one and only "experiencer".
The NDEs, if confirmed, would (according to my theory) suggest that we need to search for some physical mechanism for telepathy - i.e., some mechanism whereby the experiences of the doctors and nurses could somehow affect the neural functioning of the patient's brain. Keep in mind that the neurons in a NDE are still alive, but they are not functioning in anything like the sort of coherent patterns that I believe are necessary for consciousness. The patient's brain is not processing sensory data in any sort of traditional way, so if, in fact, the patient wakes up with information about her surroundings that could only be obtained during the period of her brain death, I'm saying the most plausible explanation is that this information was somehow gathered and processed by other brains during that time, and then somehow becomes manifest in the patient's brain.
Discovering this mechanism for NDE might or might not provided clues about (and/or evidence for) EE because my theory of EE is driven by the physicalist assumption that the "self-centered" perspective associated with the ego is essentially a set of brain processes (not some sort of non-physical "soul" floating around). According to me, EE is possible on the assumption that anywhere and anywhen these brain processes exist, then "I" am there having experiences. So if Reality is "big enough" (either infinite or FAPP infinite), then statistically speaking, the physically limited brain processes constituting my experience X could be re-created many times - or possibly even an infinite number of times.
To account for the types of immortality in which I remember "past lives" (as opposed to an amnesic re-living without realizing I've done all this before), or even "other lives" (e.g., some composite self remembering being me and also being you), we might need something like a mixture of the NDE telepathy mechanism and the statistical logic of physicalist (non-theistic) EE.
Obviously none of this rules out the possibility of a Divine Creator/Universal Mind/God, but I'm arguing that we can plausibly talk about NDEs and EE on purely physicalist grounds - no need for theistic assumptions. Even if we do someday confirm that both NDEs and EE are real, we would still not necessarily have any reason to think that a Divine Creator or all-knowing "God" exists.
because we can't store and process memory yet using a cell you dismiss it? and focus on what we don't know.
The quick answer is yes. I've discussed this idea in excruciating detail over the course of many pages over in the philosophy forum. Here is one example that I think gets at the main points:
Although I've acquired a few new analytic tools and rhetorical strategies along the way, my bottom line idea about "life after death" has not changed. I am, however, adding one new idea in relation to Sam Parnia's NDE research discussed earlier in this thread: I've suggested that the Near Death stories recounted by patients don't really have much to do with the larger concept of "life after death," according to my theory. Basically, NDEs and something like "eternal experience" (let's say "EE" for short) are relatively independent mechanisms in my theory. Confirming NDEs would lend some interesting support for the possibility of EE, and vice versa, but either one could be true without the other being true, insofar as my theory is concerned.
What could potentially connect the NDE and EE mechanisms, of course, is the holistic notion that Reality Itself is, in each and every instance of experience, the one and only "experiencer".
The NDEs, if confirmed, would (according to my theory) suggest that we need to search for some physical mechanism for telepathy - i.e., some mechanism whereby the experiences of the doctors and nurses could somehow affect the neural functioning of the patient's brain. Keep in mind that the neurons in a NDE are still alive, but they are not functioning in anything like the sort of coherent patterns that I believe are necessary for consciousness. The patient's brain is not processing sensory data in any sort of traditional way, so if, in fact, the patient wakes up with information about her surroundings that could only be obtained during the period of her brain death, I'm saying the most plausible explanation is that this information was somehow gathered and processed by other brains during that time, and then somehow becomes manifest in the patient's brain.
Discovering this mechanism for NDE might or might not provided clues about (and/or evidence for) EE because my theory of EE is driven by the physicalist assumption that the "self-centered" perspective associated with the ego is essentially a set of brain processes (not some sort of non-physical "soul" floating around). According to me, EE is possible on the assumption that anywhere and anywhen these brain processes exist, then "I" am there having experiences. So if Reality is "big enough" (either infinite or FAPP infinite), then statistically speaking, the physically limited brain processes constituting my experience X could be re-created many times - or possibly even an infinite number of times.
To account for the types of immortality in which I remember "past lives" (as opposed to an amnesic re-living without realizing I've done all this before), or even "other lives" (e.g., some composite self remembering being me and also being you), we might need something like a mixture of the NDE telepathy mechanism and the statistical logic of physicalist (non-theistic) EE.
Obviously none of this rules out the possibility of a Divine Creator/Universal Mind/God, but I'm arguing that we can plausibly talk about NDEs and EE on purely physicalist grounds - no need for theistic assumptions. Even if we do someday confirm that both NDEs and EE are real, we would still not necessarily have any reason to think that a Divine Creator or all-knowing "God" exists.
Yes, there's a Thought. while perpetuation of the consciousness as an Identity after the body is long gone (though a mind without a brain for it to float in seems counter intuitive - but so are Black Holes!) that life after death (maybe even eternal Life..Sounds Awful ...) needn't be anything to do with NDE's which might simply be products of the mind unrealted to any exterior reality. Or they might not be, of course.
Results of research still awaited.
P.s I will let you draw your own conclusions about our Pall Arach and his contributions.
because we can't store and process memory yet using a cell you dismiss it? and focus on what we don't know.
hmmm.
I don't know what you are getting at, but for what it's worth, I like what you said back on page 4:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
its funny. We think this body is it. This body is not even an "noun", it really is an average set of events that that we call us. The events continue. kind of like the words 'football game".
Where did the game come from?
where did it go?
take the game apart, to the smallest piece of it you can find. You won't find the game. The was game was/is there. Where is the game now?
A game is a physical process that emerges from interacting parts, and, as you point out in a later post, even the "particles" of physics are, themselves, processes identified via human conventions. In my theory, "the game" is brain processing, and any particular conscious experience just is the physical processing of a particular brain at a particular time. For the purposes of discussing NDEs and EE (EE="Eternal Experience"), I am simply pointing out that physical brain processes are holistically interconnected with Reality-as-a-whole, and thus there are possible avenues for research that could explain both NDEs and EE without any need for the "Creator God" hypothesis. I'm not dismissing the concept of God, I'm simply saying that we don't need it for anything that relates to the topic of this thread. Physicalism itself has, in principle, sufficient conceptual resources to deal with both NDEs and EE.
BUT, I am suggesting that the way in which physicalism can deal with both of these claims (assuming one or both turn out to be confirmed) would, itself, have some profound spiritual implications that go somewhat beyond the mindset of traditional materialism.
You ask:
Where did the game come from?
My answer is mostly standard physicalism: The game is a higher-level (emergent) phenomena that "comes from" the fundamental components of Reality, in essentially the same way that a football game "comes from" pre-existent human bodies that, for a period of time, scoot around on a field in more or less law-like ways. The bodies existed before the game, and they continue to exist after the game, but "the game" only exists so long as the bodies are running around in certain patterns.
You ask:
Where did it go?
If I am correct, then "I" (in the sense of my ego, memories, etc.) do not survive the disintegration of my brain. "I" cease to exist when the emergent processes that constitute my conscious experiences cease to exist. But so long as the fundamental components of my "game" continue to exist, there is always a statistical possibility that, functionally speaking, "the same game" could be played again in some far-flung corner of Realty, or a game that is functionally very similar could be played. If so, then "I" am going to be there to exactly the same extent that "I" will be there when I wake up tomorrow morning. The gaps of eons or light years are completely irrelevant to the functional identity of emergent processes across time and space. And if the fundamental components and laws of Reality happen to be such that my game can somehow incorporate memories of "other games" (either "past life" or "other person" games), then "I" will nevertheless be there to experience these new composite life memories.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 03-02-2017 at 11:05 AM..
Thank you. Arach could not have asked for better, fairer and more respectful response.
You and I are both on the side of physicalism -and I can't for the life of me decide whether I am on the side of physicalism because I am an atheists, or I'm an atheist because I'm on the side of physicalism. But it doesn't matter as the "physical" is the default until Something More - which you nicely indicate as having 'spiritual applications is accepted as verified.
I know we agreed to differ (heatedly by respectfully) over the evidence for dualism. but I am quite interested in the research or theorizing at least about what might be beyond the physical -material, because I want to know.
And it wouldn't bother me if it was proven true. That in itself is not evidence for a god, and even a god wouldn't do more than turn me into an irreligious theist (like Anthonty Flew) as there is no way back for the Bible.
I noted you hinting at what I call "emergence" though I really mean evolution -including chemical evolution.
I don't know what you are getting at, but for what it's worth, I like what you said back on page 4:
A game is a physical process that emerges from interacting parts, and, as you point out in a later post, even the "particles" of physics are, themselves, processes identified via human conventions. In my theory, "the game" is brain processing, and any particular conscious experience just is the physical processing of a particular brain at a particular time. For the purposes of discussing NDEs and EE (EE="Eternal Experience"), I am simply pointing out that physical brain processes are holistically interconnected with Reality-as-a-whole, and thus there are possible avenues for research that could explain both NDEs and EE without any need for the "Creator God" hypothesis. I'm not dismissing the concept of God, I'm simply saying that we don't need it for anything that relates to the topic of this thread. Physicalism itself has, in principle, sufficient conceptual resources to deal with both NDEs and EE.
BUT, I am suggesting that the way in which physicalism can deal with both of these claims (assuming one or both turn out to be confirmed) would, itself, have some profound spiritual implications that go somewhat beyond the mindset of traditional materialism.
You ask:
Where did the game come from?
My answer is mostly standard physicalism: The game is a higher-level (emergent) phenomena that "comes from" the fundamental components of Reality, in essentially the same way that a football game "comes from" pre-existent human bodies that, for a period of time, scoot around on a field in more or less law-like ways. The bodies existed before the game, and they continue to exist after the game, but "the game" only exists so long as the bodies are running around in certain patterns.
You ask:
Where did it go?
If I am correct, then "I" (in the sense of my ego, memories, etc.) do not survive the disintegration of my brain. "I" cease to exist when the emergent processes that constitute my conscious experiences cease to exist. But so long as the fundamental components of my "game" continue to exist, there is always a statistical possibility that, functionally speaking, "the same game" could be played again in some far-flung corner of Realty, or a game that is functionally very similar could be played. If so, then "I" am going to be there to exactly the same extent that "I" will be there when I wake up tomorrow morning. The gaps of eons or light years are completely irrelevant to the functional identity of emergent processes across time and space. And if the fundamental components and laws of Reality happen to be such that my game can somehow incorporate memories of "other games" (either "past life" or "other person" games), then "I" will nevertheless be there to experience these new composite life memories.
yeah, I agree with this.
I have said many times our lives are due to the interactions of the particles involved . The "game" emerged from the interactions of particles and we can easily work down powers of ten or up powers of ten.
Our brains are like little nodes of high density processors that are interconnected in this volume space. But this whole volume around us is processing information. This connection is measured using any number of understandings in chemisty, physics, and biology. Our volume would is best described as "alive". the implication for the "spiritual" side is that the connections people feel are real and that a larger "life form" will emerge when we can get a larger perspective. At least we can describe the volume of the earth for that.
"spiritual meaning" is not my area, I only need mechanisms that make correct predictions and the spiritual stuff is left to people that need that kind of stuff. NDE's are the brain shutting down and Brains shut down in a predictable way. The person will experience his/her memories.
The life form will be patterns that match patterns we call life. I offered a measurement to show that we are in a system that is life. But they refused to take the measurement. Something about sortagods, denial, and avoidance.
The "Game" is stored in the states of matter. But the game does not exist anymore in our world. I am not interested in the probability the exact game going on 10^28 light years away. our lives are stored in the states from that point on. But nothing like taught in Christianity.
I only work with what we have, so "showing it can be done without a creator" is meaningless to me. The data doesn't lead one to conclude a "religious creator" so it doesn't need to be disproved for me. The data does show a conclusion that maybe the universe was born.
Not sure why some atheists are so against such simple notions.
If death is not the end, then perhaps it opens up the possibility for some Atheists to look beyond what they believe?
And I don't necessarily talk about Atheists start believing in the existence of God. NO! I am not saying that.
I am talking about opening up the door of curiosity, and attempt to gain more knowledge as to what is it after death if it's proven not to be the end?
Absolutely! NDE stories have definitely opened my mind. While I still can't contemplate a bearded guy in the sky (the old Indo-European sky god), I am now open to the Giant Ball of Light. The stories about The Light have my attention.
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.
. And this is no longer Religion and phiosophy and discusion of science (though not - I gather - referring to it in religion questions) is counter to ToS. Over to you.
NDE stories have definitely opened my mind. While I still can't contemplate a bearded guy in the sky (the old Indo-European sky god), I am now open to the Giant Ball of Light. The stories about The Light have my attention. 