What is individual ?


china
#1
What is the individual? What are you, actually? Obviously, certain physiological responses, bodily responses and psychological responses of memory, of time, constitute the individual. We are all composed of frustrated hopes, depressions with an occasional joy, in which the self is, the `me' with all its fears, hopes, degradations, memories. We are a repository of tradition, of knowledge, of belief, of what we would like to be, and of the desire for certainty, of continuity with a name and a form. That is what actually we are. We are the result of our father and mother, of environmental influences, climatically and psychologically. That is what is. Beyond that we do not know. We can only speculate; we can only assert; we can only say that we are the soul, immortal, imperishable; but, actually, that has no existence.Your thought as always.
 
s_lone
#2
Quote: Originally Posted by china View Post

We can only speculate; we can only assert; we can only say that we are the soul, immortal, imperishable; but, actually, that has no existence.Your thought as always.

You're gonna have to back up that claim China. Prove me that an immortal and imperishable soul has no existence.
Last edited by s_lone; Feb 2nd, 2008 at 10:22 PM..
 
Pangloss
#3
I'm with s_lone on this one, China: you've hopelessly contradicted yourself yet again.

Pangloss
 
talloola
#4
[quote=china;924231]What is the individual? We are all composed of frustrated hopes, depressions with an occasional joy, in which the self is, the `me' with all its fears, hopes, degradations, memories.

This is not a very happy person, the balance is definitely on the 'negative' side, is that
an example of yourself china, cause it certainly doesn't fit the 'me', as in 'I'.
Last edited by talloola; Feb 3rd, 2008 at 02:03 AM..
 
china
#5
s_lone

Quote:

You're gonna have to back up that claim China. Prove me that an immortal and imperishable soul has no existence.

That's not hard s_lone, ok. show me your soul first
Last edited by china; Feb 3rd, 2008 at 03:53 AM..
 
china
#6
taloolla
Quote:


This is not a very happy person, the balance is definitely on the 'negative' side, is that
an example of yourself china, cause it certainly doesn't fit the 'me', as in 'I'.

It's neither negative or positive ....it's actual.Observe .
Obviously there are always exceptions talolla .
Last edited by china; Feb 4th, 2008 at 01:10 AM..
 
Scott Free
#7
Is this a rhetorical question or do you want to hear how others view their individuality; or is this a nature vs nurture question?
 
china
#8
Hi Scott Free, thanks for your interest in the thread and the following post:
Quote:

Is this a rhetorical question or do you want to hear how others view their individuality; or is this a nature vs nurture question?

First of all this is not a question ;tha's just the way it is.Furthermore it's not that hard to reason it out for anyone (for most-anyhow) .
 
china
#9
Pangloss
I'm with s_lone on this one, China: you've hopelessly contradicted yourself yet again.
Quote:

I'm with s_lone on this one, China: you've hopelessly contradicted yourself yet again.

Hey genius ,I am inviting you to show me where I have "hopelessly" contradicted myself.If you are successful and your "proof" is based on facts ,then I will not place any more posts in this forum .But if you fail to prove to me that I have contradicted myself , then its an exit out for you , from the forum mister,and that's fair enough mister .
Last edited by china; Feb 3rd, 2008 at 07:56 AM..
 
s_lone
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by china View Post

s_lone

That's not hard s_lone, ok. show me your soul first

My soul is outpoured in my words China. You outpour yours in every single word you post.

I'm also a musician. If you're interested in hearing music I do. You can PM me. Don't you think music is language of the soul?

I have a soul in the sense that I have thoughts and feelings. Do I have a soul in the sense that there's a part of myself that will go on following the death of my physical body? I freely admit I don't know. However, you affirmed the soul had no existence. You seem to be certain about this. How about explaining what makes you so certain about it?
 
china
#11
s_lone

Quote:

Do I have a soul in the sense that there's a part of myself that will go on following the death of my physical body? I freely admit I don't know. However, you affirmed the soul had no existence. You seem to be certain about this. How about explaining what makes you so certain about it?

Quote:

I freely admit ,I don't know,

Neither do I ....s_long.,this is what makes me so certain about this.I know a word for it in 4 languages ( probably more ,if I'll think hard) but I surely don't know what it is , but it doesn't mean there isn't one.Again this is what makes me so certain about this.Trust me I'm not talking nonsense .Dont judge ,ask questions.

Love music ,play guitar past 43 ys.Not a harp ,so I don/t know if I qualify .
 
MikeyDB
#12

China

One’s present affirmation of existence of ‘being’… is the result/process of cumulative phenomenal experience (d) and the inherited/genetic condition of physicality. When we awake in the morning we retain this complex of “identity” because consistency of experience affords the only mechanism/condition capable of successfully supporting consciousness. So in many respects one could say that the experience of ‘being’ is product of the past, and hence since our ‘being’, the ‘now’ of experience/sentience critically relies on every thought emotion and memory that preceded the ‘now’, our individuality and our experience of existence rides the event wave of consciousness expanding into the future. Cognitively speaking, the brains 40 Hz. (approximate) “refresh rate” could be interpreted as implying that our sense or experience of individuated consciousness lasts only for that brief period between refresh events….

“Andrews et al duplicated Sherrington's result but investigated it further. They found that when lights were flashed in each eye alternately at low frequences (2 Hz) the experience was the same as a light being flashed in both eyes at this rate. At frequencies of four Hz and higher the subjects began to report that the lights being flashed alternately in both eyes seemed to flicker at the same rate as lights being flashed in both eyes at half the frequency. It seemed as if a flash in one eye followed by a flash in the other eye was being perceived as a single flash or "conflated" as the authors put it. The authors explained this effect by suggesting that the brain activity corresponding to the flashes was sampled for a short period and any number of flashes occurring during this period became perceived as a single flash. The maximum rate of sampling would be about 45 Hz. This idea is similar to option (1) above, where the buffer is filled and emptied 40 - 50 times a second.”

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~lka/conz3a2.htm

The article excerpted above as well as many other neuroscience papers support the idea that consciousness resides…and hence “individuality” and “being” resides in the dynamic condition of electrochemical/neurological process. Our integration of experience and phenomenal “awareness” aren’t static and fixed, rather constantly changing as “updates” to the cellular complex of the brain is re-freshed through neurotransmitter responses to stimuli. A caution of sorts is required when pursuing this line of reasoning however….

While visual processing and the human visual “refresh-rate” is a well documented physiological condition/phenomenon, a similar metric for the processes of memory and biological/neurological updating to the storage areas of the brain remain elusive. Elusive not so much in the absence of supporting data, but in resloving a clearer picture of how various and many external and internal stimuli are integrated and “processed” into the cortical regions that provide what we perceive as “continuity” to/of the experience of being, from nanosecond to nanosecond as well as from year to year…
 
Scott Free
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by china View Post

Hi Scott Free, thanks for your interest in the thread and the following post:

First of all this is not a question ;tha's just the way it is.Furthermore it's not that hard to reason it out for anyone (for most-anyhow) .

It is unwise to assume you "know" the truth on any matter and especially on such a weighty one as this.

If, however, you are stating it in such strong terms to solicit strong arguments, then I can understand your purpose.

If you really believe you know these things for a fact then I feel sorry for you.

Which is it? Or is there some other reason? I want to know so I can respond appropriately.

Perhaps this post is part of a long standing forum game? I'm new so I wouldn't know.
 
darkbeaver
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by china View Post

s_lone

That's not hard s_lone, ok. show me your soul first

You're reading an extension of my soul right now. Or do you believe my fat little fingers work without one?
 
MikeyDB
#15
Scott Free

It's all a game Scott!

We (humanity) is easily categorized into the particular pigeonhole that suits the dialectic.

You have the "rich" and the "poor", you have the "free-thinkers" and the indoctrinated who parrot the appropriate expression to convince the listener and themselves that their perspective and ideas conform to the "accepted"....

Anyone who thinks outside the conditioning and formula responses is by necessity a terrorist or a "cultist" or simply mentally handicapped. It's the regimentation of thinking as process that yields the benefits of easy manipulation at the hands of business and government and that's the way it's always been. When force or threat of violence to the end of acheiving domination failed or produced unsatisfactory side-effects, the "church" was there... Ready at the drop of a hat to sanction mass murder and spend millions to indoctrinate everyone under the guise of "god's will" to dictate morality based not on any bond or harmony with reality but to entice mankind to leave reason behind in favor of the mystical and the obscure....

"Free-Thought" has become a myth of the postmodern era.
 
darkbeaver
#16
http://www.kasjo.net/reeedcontrov.pdf

This 395 pages will help straighten out the last 3000 years, it's at least a partial explanation of what we live in today, a greater part. Don't know if you've read it or not I just like to read, sometimes you find something that helps like this does.
I am a terrorist ,cultist and mentally handicaped a true unsatisfactory sideaffect of the age. haha
 
china
#17
Scott Free

Quote:

It is unwise to assume you "know" the truth on any matter

Agree, especially on "any " matter.

Quote:

and especially on such a weighty one as this.

Have you tried to reason it out? ...I don't think that the subject is "heavy"; I invite you to ask questions .
Quote:

If, however, you are stating it in such strong terms to solicit strong arguments,

Perhaps
Quote:

then I can understand your purpose.

If you believe that , then I feel sorry for you Scott Free .
 
s_lone
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by china View Post

s_lone

Neither do I ....s_long.,this is what makes me so certain about this.I know a word for it in 4 languages ( probably more ,if I'll think hard) but I surely don't know what it is , but it doesn't mean there isn't one.Again this is what makes me so certain about this.Trust me I'm not talking nonsense .Dont judge ,ask questions.

All right, I won't judge. But I will ask questions. I'm asking you to be more clear.

When you say ''Again this is what makes me so certain about this'', what are you exactly certain of?
 
Pangloss
#19
China:

To quote you:

"Trust me I'm not talking nonsense .Dont judge ,ask questions."

Why ought we to trust you? Why oughtn't we judge? Man oh man, do those ever sound like the statements of a nascent cult leader.

Pangloss
 
china
#20
To quote you:

"Trust me I'm not talking nonsense .Dont judge ,ask questions."
Quote:

Pangloss
Why ought we to trust you? Why oughtn't we judge? Man oh man, do those ever sound like the statements of a nascent cult lead

er.

Mister ,You're a paranoid fruitcake .
 

Similar Threads

16
Individual forum leaders/mods
by Kreskin | Aug 25th, 2008
3
Is man an individual ?
by china | Aug 23rd, 2008
10
State Militarism vs Individual Terrorism
by jimmoyer | Apr 23rd, 2007
23
Individual or Group rights?
by I think not | Jan 14th, 2006