What do you think of this concept?

[jrlogan]

I am new at here at PF and originally posted part of this in an inappropriate forum then added a few words and moved it here but didn't like it as it read so I deleted it and started a fresh thread.
I was very tired and about to drop one night when I had a strange thought about where did everything come from. I wondered how you could prove that
I am not just a figment of another's imagination or can you prove that you are not just a figment of my imagination or that we are both just a figment of someone else's imagination. It made me wonder further about how is it that anything is as we know it to be. I have come to the conclusion that the physical world has at it's base, components articles that can only have come from a consciouseness of some sort and without that consciouseness there could be nothing, but upon establishing that I realize that I am, I cannot escape the conclusion that there always was, and could never could have there been "nothing". Zero is an imaginary number. An arbitrary starting point
to begin counting from. Without it there could be no number line such as 1,2,3,4,5,...ad.infinitum. There could only be the "infinite one". So it is my beleife that we live in a "virtual reality". The following was my original post:

Here is what I believe to be the base concepts for understanding a strategy towards discovering the equations of the grand unified theory, and all other theories that have to do with existence,space,time,etc..
First of all, know that all complex things and designs are built from simple components.Here are what I believe to be the simplest components: yes/not | begin/off | all/none | is/no | on/end |add/divide | subtract/multiply | know/forget |say/wait |once/again/stop/again/end | up/down | left/right | top/bottom |
alike/attract | for/neutral/against | with/not with | let/hold | desire/purpose/design/create | reflect/admire.
This may look crazy but isn't it strange that we are here, and can hold a hand in front if our face and know that it is there? I believe that conscienceness is everywhere but the state of awareness adds with complexity of design and integration of the simple components and grows into higher states, increasing in ability to become a being of soul,and ability. I know-therefore I am. My parts are integrated and functions
are able and real and have being instead of just being a concept. Does any of this make any sense to anyone but me? Surely if you can see then you must agree. -- JRLogan.

 

[Tensor]

And this is why people came up with the materialist theory.

 

[peacebird]

so v r progressing towards god

 

[sd01g]

.
I was very tired and about to drop one night when I had a strange thought about where did everything come from. I wondered how you could prove that
I am not just a figment of another's imagination or can you prove that you are not just a figment of my imagination or that we are both just a figment of someone else's imagination. -- JRLogan.

Hello jrlogan: There is a simple test to determine if one is a

'thought or concept' or if one is 'real or physical.' Just try to see

how long you can hold your breath. IF you are a 'thought or concept'

then you should be able to hold your breath as long as you like--Just

conceptualize that you no longer have to breathe. IF you realize that

you do in fact have to breathe, then you are REAL and if anyone tells

you otherwise, tell them to take the breath test.

Note: This test works best if you are sober.

 

[jrlogan]

Are you not "begging the question"?

 

[sd01g]

Where is the evidence?

Are you not "begging the question"?

If the 'Breath' test is unsatisfactory, then one must fall back to the fundamentals. Is there any evidence whatsoever that the physical world of matter/energy is a dream or exists only in the mind of a dreamer? Note: This is a question-not a premise. If you have any Empirical evidence-please present it. If you have any Rational evidence-it would be appreciated. If you have any Imaginary evidence-Wait, Imaginary evidence is not evidence.
I can find no evidence that imaginary-dream world is Real or that the Real world is an imaginary-dream world. NO evidence at all.

 

[jrlogan]

have you been able to search EVERYWHERE? Is it possible there are places where the evidence lies that is not reachable by you,the searcher. I do appreciate your feedback.
I am maybe not as educated as many of you and it is more my goal to ask questioins than it is to argue, however I still think that you are begging the question with your argument that "the breath test" is able to prove anything about the nature of "reality".

 

[jrlogan]

post script

This is a post script to my pevious post. I originally proposed the idea that something we refer to as "mind" or "thought" is responsible for stuff that we reefer to as "matter" and with that proposed premise in mind asked the question "can you prove that I am not a figment of your imagination or that you are not just a figment of my imagination or is both of our existences dependent upon a greater mind? I see it easier to prove than to disprove, in the same manner that if I were viewing a container partially filled with, let's say, apples; it would be much easier to say that it is possible for the container to become empty of apples than it would be to say that it could become full of apples. Having seen that it partially contains apples makes it easy to say that it could become empty of them but much harder to say that it could become full with them. Where is this leading? Ok,
lets look at some "evidence" that there is more to "thought" than just concepts lacking a physical reality. I would reefer you to a particular experiment done at Princeton university which can be read about at http://falundafa-newengland.org/MA/science/mind.htm. I will not say anything
here about this, I invite you to see for yourself.

 

[sd01g]

have you been able to search EVERYWHERE? Is it possible there are places where the evidence lies that is not reachable by you,the searcher. I do appreciate your feedback.
I am maybe not as educated as many of you and it is more my goal to ask questioins than it is to argue, however I still think that you are begging the question with your argument that "the breath test" is able to prove anything about the nature of "reality".

It is helpful to realize that evidence one cannot find really is not

evidence. Evidence one imagines is not evidence and evidence one

dreams is not evidence. The supposition that a human being (or the

world or the universe) exists only in the MIND of God or some other

dreamer is so devoid of evidence that it is a preposterous

supposition. The good news is that if someone wants to believe that

they are a dream, it is OK. Who knows, maybe someday the

COSMIC DREAMER will wake up and we will all be gone.

 

[<<<GUILLE>>>]

Hello jrlogan: There is a simple test to determine if one is a

'thought or concept' or if one is 'real or physical.' Just try to see

how long you can hold your breath. IF you are a 'thought or concept'

then you should be able to hold your breath as long as you like--Just

conceptualize that you no longer have to breathe. IF you realize that

you do in fact have to breathe, then you are REAL and if anyone tells

you otherwise, tell them to take the breath test.

Note: This test works best if you are sober.

Who says that breathing isn't a concept? Who and how has it been proven?

(this is hipothetical, i don't believe they are concepts=) how can you prove that feeling, life, existence...aren't concepts?
I can't prove that the are a concept, but if nobody proves that they aren't a concept, there is no reason why I am wrong.

 

[sd01g]

Breathing rules

Who says that breathing isn't a concept? Who and how has it been proven?

(this is hipothetical, i don't believe they are concepts=) how can you prove that feeling, life, existence...aren't concepts?
I can't prove that the are a concept, but if nobody proves that they aren't a concept, there is no reason why I am wrong.

One can conceptualize, imagine, dream anything. One can conceptualize, imagine, dream that one does not need to breathe.
However, if one stops breathing and breathes no more (please do not try this without medical supervision) then one is dead. Game over. No more conceptualizing, imagining, or dreaming.

Does this prove anything? Yes, BREATHING trumps conceptualizing, imagining and dreaming. Remember: BREATHING RULES!

 

[jrlogan]

Marco Biagini who has a Ph.D. in Solid State Physics has a different view. His thoughts about cosciousness can be read at: http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html
CSDC
If it is all right to post this then here is an excerpt from his site:"... The laws of physics prove that the psyche cannot be the product of physical, chemical or biological processes. Therefore, the origin of our psyche is transcendent to the physical reality. We can then identify with God the necessary Cause of the existence of the psyche, being such Cause transcendent. This represents a scientific confirmation of the christian doctrine according to which each man has a soul, created directly by God. I think that it is correct to say that today the existence of the soul and the existence of a transcendent God are scientifically proved..."

 

[jrlogan]

oops,I got it backwards

I don't know how to change it but I made the poll options backwards. I meant: "yes", "no",and "no, and I also believe in..." I must be more carefull next time. Can I correct this?

 

[sd01g]

:"... The laws of physics prove that the psyche cannot be the product of physical, chemical or biological processes. Therefore, the origin of our psyche is transcendent to the physical reality.
..."

Assuming the laws of physics are the same in OK as they are in CO,

then it is not possible for anything real to transcend physical reality.

It is possible (but not highly probable) that the human soul is an

'energy construct' using modulated graviton particles to interact with a

Higher Power that is a 'higher energy construct graviton modulator.'

This could be real things operating in real time/space. There are still

things in the real world we do not understand or might not be aware of.

Note: When one TRANSCENDS time and space, one finds nothing.

 

[<<<GUILLE>>>]

One can conceptualize, imagine, dream anything. One can conceptualize, imagine, dream that one does not need to breathe.
However, if one stops breathing and breathes no more (please do not try this without medical supervision) then one is dead. Game over. No more conceptualizing, imagining, or dreaming.

Does this prove anything? Yes, BREATHING trumps conceptualizing, imagining and dreaming. Remember: BREATHING RULES!

What if death is also a concept?

and life is a concept?

How do you know they aren't, and demonstrate it.

 

[selfAdjoint]

What if death is also a concept?

and life is a concept?

How do you know they aren't, and demonstrate it.

No, you demonstrate that they ARE! I don't have to believe or even seriously consider every random speculation.

 

[sd01g]

What if death is also a concept?

and life is a concept?

How do you know they aren't, and demonstrate it.

Obviously you did not complete the test (please do not) --If you had, you

would have had your demonstration.

In the final analysis, one cannot PROVE anything to anyone. You are free to

determine what you decide is REAL and TRUE.

 

[<<<GUILLE>>>]

No, you demonstrate that they ARE! I don't have to believe or even seriously consider every random speculation.

I don't have do demonstrate that they are because I don't think so (I say this in my first post).

I just asked, that because breathing is part of life, and he was considering breathing isn't a concept, then life also shouldn't be. But we can't demonstrate they are concepts or not, because they are part of us, and our existence: we are in them, they are superior to us. as well as demonstrating if they are real or not is also over us.

But anyway, i don't say you can't try to, you have total free will.

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

The horse is ahead of the wagon! It doesn't matter if we are being dreamed or if we are real ("dreaming" and "real" are concepts that we satisfactorilly define to ourselves, whose to say that there is a difference between the two?). What is real? What is a dream? We can't answer these questions with certainty. It's up to all of us to willingly respect each other and give the benefit of the doubt to each other when we feel that the other person may not really understand what we mean to convey. The fact that we exist (whatever that means... but I hope you can understand that I may not have the string of words that best fits your satisfaction of the definition of existence) is enough for me. Does it really matter if life and death are "concepts" or if they are "real" or "imaginary"? Suppose you proved that life isn't real, what would you do next? be the "life of the party" at your own backyard BBQ? Or would you be a hermit, shut-in, exile, calculating your predictions of other people's behavior?

 

[Jonny_trigonometry]

hehe, don't I look stupid! I meant to say "the wagon is ahead of the horse". One more comment, this is all my opinion, and I know it's nowhere near a true explanation.

 

[cronxeh]

http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/mindandbrain.html

The author of that has a very poor logic and comes off as someone who tries to extrapolate basic scientific knowledge into areas he is not very well familiar, and fails miserably.

This guy: Marco Biagini
Ph.D. in Solid State Physics

 

[hypnagogue]

Marco Biagini who has a Ph.D. in Solid State Physics has a different view. His thoughts about cosciousness can be read at: http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html

The arguments on this site are poor and have already received extensive critique here on PF; see this thread.

 

[jrlogan]

I agree with you about Marco Biagini. I too thought he was a rather poor debater/arguer,whatever you want to call it. I thought maybe he was just not very well gifted at making long statements of hypothesies and /or statements/logical conclusions.
I do apollogize for the reference.