You are nothing

[AnnaG]

I'm not sure I really follow what you're saying here. What I understand from what you have said is that "being aware of anyone can inspire them to do things." Putting that into context, if I'm aware of Alex Trebeck, he will be inspired to do some thing..

No. The "nothing" that my ego (consciousness) is can inspire what makes up the rest of me to do stuff. If it can inspire me, it isn't nothing.

The existence of your ego is not in question. The nature of the existence of your ego is what is in question.

Ah. It isn't physical or tangible, therefore it is nothing. I see. It's a false premise but I suppose it has its proponents. In order for something to have a nature, there must be something there.

The existence of a material substance that would constitute something's physicality is 'real'. The absence of a material substance that would constitute someone's character, personality, etc. is also 'real'.

But the absence of a material substance that is being part of a material being is nothing. I see.

Both of those qualities exist and are real. If I were to say: "AnnaG is the best conversationalist on the forums", at that moment in time I have recalled your ego which now exists in reflective consciousness. That ego, while there may be energy or mass or electrical sparks going on in my brain to represent its fruition, is still only an object of consciousness. Much in the same way, if I recall a former post of mine, and also in the same way if I attempt to predict future posts in this thread.

It may have an influence on my future decision making and yours, but it still constitutes as nothing. It may lead to 'something' and it may be inspirational, but the very crux of that awareness stems from the nothingness of possibility. What is real and something and if you'd like to attribute that to yourself is the actual action itself. But at that point in time, your ego actually doesn't exist; it only does so after you think - 'I did that' or beforehand - 'I will do that'.

Then there is no such thing as potential energy either. It is nothing. I see.

That level of awareness is what Sartre calls - 'pre-reflective' consciousness. That is the level of awareness where the ego does not exist but only the world does. 'That's a tree! That's a cat! That's a thing!' And then he goes on a bit, I think, about how we're trying to get to that level of awareness naturally, such that we don't have to continue referring to our ego in reflective consciousness.

Yeah. I think it's a little like religions. Things that demand we be something we cannot possibly be; perfection (at least perfection according to what we think perfection is). Fool's play.

I think there are an awful lot of people that just cannot grasp the concept of what nothing consists of but they toss the term around as if they do. .

By the time you came to the realization you felt wonderful, you ceased to exist as something.

roflmao Too much Krishnamurti? He had to be something afterwards. Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about him feeling wonderful after eating i scream.

 

[mentalfloss]

roflmao Too much Krishnamurti? He had to be something afterwards. Otherwise we wouldn't be talking about him feeling wonderful after eating i scream.

I scream indeed. 8O

 

[talloola]

If we break everything down to its very basic components, we end up with energy. Energy can take on different forms depending on the frequency of that energy: sound, light, heat and motion. Some can emanate all at the same time, like us. That energy permeates the entire Universe and connects everything to everything else. The aboriginal people call it the web of life. Pluck any strand on the web and effects the entire web. That is a concept that most people have a hard time wrapping their minds around because it entails a tremendous responsibility to life. In that sense, you are not nothing; you are an integral part of everything.

yes that all makes sense to me, as long as it connects to a scientific direction, as I cannot
refer in any way to myths, angels, fairies, gods, and other stories that connect us to that
side of the universe. that is not for me, and I don't truly believe in any way there is any
of that in our beings at all, but the way you explained it does not include any gods
spirits, angels, but does have a scientific base to it.

 

[Cliffy]

yes that all makes sense to me, as long as it connects to a scientific direction, as I cannot
refer in any way to myths, angels, fairies, gods, and other stories that connect us to that
side of the universe. that is not for me, and I don't truly believe in any way there is any
of that in our beings at all, but the way you explained it does not include any gods
spirits, angels, but does have a scientific base to it.

If everything is basically energy, then I think what we experience as physical reality has a lot to do with what we have been taught to believe reality is. Thus, my experiences with aboriginal peoples allowed me to have a peek into what they believe about reality. They believe in, say, animal spirits that they see and from who they receive guidance for their lives. In Europe, some people believe in angels, others in fairies and gnomes, some people believe in aliens, some believe in dragons. Many will tell you that they have seen and experienced such things in their lives. I think that what they experience is the same thing, only belief determines the form of such things that they see. What those "apparitions" are and where they come from, I don't know.

But if everything is energy, does it really matter? The only thing that matters is the person believes it happened, so who are we to question their experience? A lot of people think those people are delusional or psychotic, believing in fairy tales but I don't. I have studied enough psychology to at least allow them the right to believe what they want. My own personal experiences have shown me the power of the human mind to manifest all kinds of things, including the power to frighten themselves to death.

 

[talloola]

If everything is basically energy, then I think what we experience as physical reality has a lot to do with what we have been taught to believe reality is. Thus, my experiences with aboriginal peoples allowed me to have a peek into what they believe about reality. They believe in, say, animal spirits that they see and from who they receive guidance for their lives. In Europe, some people believe in angels, others in fairies and gnomes, some people believe in aliens, some believe in dragons. Many will tell you that they have seen and experienced such things in their lives. I think that what they experience is the same thing, only belief determines the form of such things that they see. What those "apparitions" are and where they come from, I don't know.

But if everything is energy, does it really matter? The only thing that matters is the person believes it happened, so who are we to question their experience? A lot of people think those people are delusional or psychotic, believing in fairy tales but I don't. I have studied enough psychology to at least allow them the right to believe what they want. My own personal experiences have shown me the power of the human mind to manifest all kinds of things, including the power to frighten themselves to death.

absolutely, the imagination is a powerful tool for some, and becomes their reality, then turns on them
and makes their lives unbearable or wonderful, for them, yes we must allow them to believe whatever they
want, if it works for them, makes them happy, and their lives better, so be it.

 

[mentalfloss]

The idea of energy or matter being the basis for all existence is a major tenet of materialism, and while it is scientifically plausible to some degree, it is impossible at this time to show how consciousness is any composition of either energy or matter. The second problem with this viewpoint is it technically makes freedom of choice an illusion and promotes varying degrees of determinism.

 

[Cliffy]

The idea of energy or matter being the basis for all existence is a major tenet of materialism, and while it is scientifically plausible to some degree, it is impossible at this time to show how consciousness is any composition of either energy or matter. The second problem with this viewpoint is it technically makes freedom of choice an illusion and promotes varying degrees of determinism.

I disagree. As I believe we create our own reality based on beliefs, thought patterns and our emotional and psychic states. Most of those aspects are controllable by us. Will and intent can play a major role in how we experience physical reality. If we think we are fat, ugly, dumb, poor, rich, smart, beautiful, fit, we are. We are what we believe and we experience what we believe. The problem is, most people don't know that or don't believe it so they create their reality based on what other people told them it was about.

If you were told as a child that you were fat stupid and ugly, that is how you will experience your life unless you realize that you can change that by changing your mind, attitude and belief. Why do people like Oprah continue on the weight roller coaster? Free will will set us free. The only things that are predetermined are those things we learn as a child and don't know that we can change.

 

[mentalfloss]

I disagree. As I believe we create our own reality based on beliefs, thought patterns and our emotional and psychic states. Most of those aspects are controllable by us. Will and intent can play a major role in how we experience physical reality. If we think we are fat, ugly, dumb, poor, rich, smart, beautiful, fit, we are. We are what we believe and we experience what we believe. The problem is, most people don't know that or don't believe it so they create their reality based on what other people told them it was about.

If you were told as a child that you were fat stupid and ugly, that is how you will experience your life unless you realize that you can change that by changing your mind, attitude and belief. Why do people like Oprah continue on the weight roller coaster? Free will will set us free. The only things that are predetermined are those things we learn as a child and don't know that we can change.

Mmm.. I understand where you are coming from and that's why there are varying degrees of deterministic thought. While you can have the free choice to will certain things, if you do take the materialist view that all existence is made of energy or matter, you have to also ascribe to the view that there is a finite amount of that energy or matter and while freedom appears to be a creative construct, it's only done so within the constraints of using this existing energy or matter.

Now, if you step back and take a pragmatic view of things, you may think that the illusion is alright since we have enough matter and energy to work with and can have incredibly fruitful lives regardless of the fact that the universe is finite. But even if you're told you are fat, stupid, ugly or whatever, and you later change those monikers and become free of that prision - if you believe in materialism, then that freedom of choice was still an illusion to the degree that the phenomenon of your thoughts and ideas which led to this change will always be represented by some material substance.

Also, if that is so, then there is definitely the possibility we could later develop technology that could take direct control over those thoughts and ideas.

 

[Cliffy]

Also, if that is so, then there is definitely the possibility we could later develop technology that could take direct control over those thoughts and ideas.

We already do, it's called TV, the biggest and baddest mind control device so far invented.

Kill your TV!

BTW, what do you think is a more realistic approach? How do you know that the Universe is finite? Even if it is, how much energy do you need to control your own reality?

 

[AnnaG]

The idea of energy or matter being the basis for all existence is a major tenet of materialism, and while it is scientifically plausible to some degree, it is impossible at this time to show how consciousness is any composition of either energy or matter.

So you don't think energy can have patterns? Different patterns for different traits, actions, etc.?

The second problem with this viewpoint is it technically makes freedom of choice an illusion and promotes varying degrees of determinism.

That's a problem?

I disagree. As I believe we create our own reality based on beliefs, thought patterns and our emotional and psychic states.

That's ok for our individual subjective realities, but we also share aspects of those (some people like blue more than yellow or red, and so on), as well as sharing the physical realities such as water, air, etc.

Most of those aspects are controllable by us.

Most of them? Can you force yourself to like chartreuse rather than green? Can you force a tree to be a rock?

Will and intent can play a major role in how we experience physical reality. If we think we are fat, ugly, dumb, poor, rich, smart, beautiful, fit, we are. We are what we believe and we experience what we believe. The problem is, most people don't know that or don't believe it so they create their reality based on what other people told them it was about.

Definitely, but I wouldn't say most people do the latter without saying sometimes.

If you were told as a child that you were fat stupid and ugly, that is how you will experience your life unless you realize that you can change that by changing your mind, attitude and belief. Why do people like Oprah continue on the weight roller coaster? Free will will set us free. The only things that are predetermined are those things we learn as a child and don't know that we can change.

.... and physical realities as well as the personal realities such as liking 1 piece of music or smell or touch over another.
Personally I think Oprah is a busy woman and sits at a desk doing business too much, hence the weight fluctuations.

Mmm.. I understand where you are coming from and that's why there are varying degrees of deterministic thought. While you can have the free choice to will certain things, if you do take the materialist view that all existence is made of energy or matter, you have to also ascribe to the view that there is a finite amount of that energy or matter and while freedom appears to be a creative construct, it's only done so within the constraints of using this existing energy or matter.

Why? Is there a law somewhere that says matter and energy have to be finite? The universe has to be finite? Everything has a beginning and end?
Personally I think the universe always was and always will be, there is no end to energy and matter, and we are constructed of a limited amount of energy and matter so we can only experience a limited amount of energy and matter. And therefore we can only experience a limited amount of the patterns that our limited matter and energy can form and have a really tough time conceiving that there might be limitless more patterns of limitless energy and matter.

Now, if you step back and take a pragmatic view of things, you may think that the illusion is alright since we have enough matter and energy to work with and can have incredibly fruitful lives regardless of the fact that the universe is finite. But even if you're told you are fat, stupid, ugly or whatever, and you later change those monikers and become free of that prision - if you believe in materialism, then that freedom of choice was still an illusion to the degree that the phenomenon of your thoughts and ideas which led to this change will always be represented by some material substance.

What is illusion though? I think it is a part of reality that we can just barely sense so it can't really "ossify" for us in our minds.

Also, if that is so, then there is definitely the possibility we could later develop technology that could take direct control over those thoughts and ideas.

Sure! I can't see why not.

 

[Cliffy]

That's ok for our individual subjective realities, but we also share aspects of those (some people like blue more than yellow or red, and so on), as well as sharing the physical realities such as water, air, etc. Most of them? Can you force yourself to like chartreuse rather than green? Can you force a tree to be a rock? Definitely, but I wouldn't say most people do the latter without saying sometimes.

.... and physical realities as well as the personal realities such as liking 1 piece of music or smell or touch over another.
Personally I think Oprah is a busy woman and sits at a desk doing business too much, hence the weight fluctuations.

That is why I stress "personal" reality. We do live within the confines of our collective reality, most of which is determined by the collective unconscious of the vast majority of people who do not realize their own power. But as yogis and shaman have illustrated, the rules can be bent. Unfortunately, most people don't believe it is possible, so they could not witness it even if they are present to witness it because it is outside their perceived realm of possibilities. I could tell you about some of my experiences but unless you are open to the possibilities presented, you will just think I'm delusional.

 

[mentalfloss]

So you don't think energy can have patterns? Different patterns for different traits, actions, etc.?

Possibly, within some degree of assumption. But we've yet to be able to deduce enough information from 'waves of energy' to formulate the exact nature of that consciousness.

Let's begin with the perfectly plausible argument that consciousness, for instance, can be entirely represented by some energy pattern or material substance. Consciousness is that material substance and our brain, for argument's sake, is a conduit for that consciousness, thereby allowing some inevitable image to arise like when we dream or think about the future.

It should be, therefore, just as plausible that with enough research about the human anatomy and these energy patterns - at some point we would be able decipher these patterns and be able to derive enough information from them to recapture this image that one may be thinking.

I'm not denying this could be true - I'm just saying that at this point we cannot derive this sort of information from these energy patterns with such a high level of fidelity.

As a side note, these energy patterns may be representative of some emotional/behavioural response, but it isn't definitive that they are representative of a 'physical consciousness'. Neither does it deny that consciousness is transcendental - wherein it is actually outside our bodies and later is infused or de-coded by our bodies.

The second problem with this viewpoint is it technically makes freedom of choice an illusion and promotes varying degrees of determinism.

That's a problem?

It's a problem for me, personally, in that I hope that, metaphysically, a free choice is truly a free choice. That determinism could actually outline a specific path from life until death, despite the appearance otherwise, is a frightening thought that I'm hoping is invalidated by the end.

Why? Is there a law somewhere that says matter and energy have to be finite?

Law of conservation of energy/mass - neither can be created nor destroyed.

 

[AnnaG]

Possibly, within some degree of assumption. But we've yet to be able to deduce enough information from 'waves of energy' to formulate the exact nature of that consciousness.

Yup.

Let's begin with the perfectly plausible argument that consciousness, for instance, can be entirely represented by some energy pattern or material substance. Consciousness is that material substance and our brain, for argument's sake, is a conduit for that consciousness, thereby allowing some inevitable image to arise like when we dream or think about the future.

It should be, therefore, just as plausible that with enough research about the human anatomy and these energy patterns - at some point we would be able decipher these patterns and be able to derive enough information from them to recapture this image that one may be thinking.

Yup.

I'm not denying this could be true - I'm just saying that at this point we cannot derive this sort of information from these energy patterns with such a high level of accuracy.

Yup. Insufficient data. It's only my hypothesis. Not exactly shelved but on a backburner until it's hot enough to cause a reaction or two.

As a side note, these energy patterns may be representative of some emotional/behavioural response, but it isn't definitive that they are representative of a 'physical consciousness'. Neither does it deny that consciousness is transcendental - wherein it is actually outside our bodies and later is infused or de-coded by our bodies.

Sure. The possibilities are endless. lol ('Scuse the pun)

It's a problem for me, personally, in that I hope that, metaphysically, a free choice is truly a free choice. That determinism could actually outline a specific path from life until death, despite the appearance otherwise, is a frightening thought that I'm hoping is invalidated by the end.

Ah. I can appreciate that.

 

[Kathie Bondar]

The nature, the inmost nature of the self, when you have gone through all the layers of the self, the essence is nothing. You are nothing. Right? On that nothingness thought has imposed the super structure of consciousness. Consciousness being the content, without the content there is no consciousness - the content being you are a Hindu, Buddhist, your religion, your particular god, your puja, your anxiety, your sorrow, your pain, your hate, your love, all that is the content of your consciousness. Obviously. And the idea that you are super atman, or super, super consciousness is part of that content. You understand what thought has done. We are absolutely nothing. All this super structure has been built by thought. And thought is the response of registration. Of course. You understand registration, like a tape. See what thought has done.

Krishnamurti .:-|

You know, I don't even know what puja is but I suspect I don't have it. In spite of this lack of puja I am certain I am a well rounded complete person, now wondering what makes you feel you are nothing. I would like to reassure you otherwise but perhaps as your personality was developing someone did a pretty good snowjob on your mind. Try to get your money back.

 

[talloola]

We already do, it's called TV, the biggest and baddest mind control device so far invented.

Kill your TV!

BTW, what do you think is a more realistic approach? How do you know that the Universe is finite? Even if it is, how much energy do you need to control your own reality?

no, don't kill your TV, I watch many wonderful travel,nature,animal,fishing, some biographys, and
movies of 'my' choice only, 'so'
the key is, make the good choices when watching tv, and never let it control you at all, or your
children.

 

[AnnaG]

no, don't kill your TV, I watch many wonderful travel,nature,animal,fishing, some biographys, and
movies of 'my' choice only, 'so'
the key is, make the good choices when watching tv, and never let it control you at all, or your
children.

Egg Zachary. I like seeing what a tapir looks and sounds like. Or what sort of construction the Japanese use to build their homes. Or how Basil Fawlty gets out of the jam he got himself into. It can be a rolling tapestry of art if you want it to be.

 

[talloola]

Egg Zachary. I like seeing what a tapir looks and sounds like. Or what sort of construction the Japanese use to build their homes. Or how Basil Fawlty gets out of the jam he got himself into. It can be a rolling tapestry of art if you want it to be.

yes, we do too, have learned so much from shows of those types, they are great.
many shows showing the very simple lives of others in different parts of the world, and I
have come to appreciate 'how' they live, and how happy they are, and I don't feel sorry
for many of them any more, they could teach us much.