Where is our seat of consciousness located?

[wuliheron]

Originally posted by ahrkron
Do you know of any site where I can find information about this? Long ago, a friend of mine used to talk about this as if he had seen the thing first hand (I mean, with that kind of confidence) but, upon further questioning, it always turned out that his information was coming from very biased sources, or word-of-mouth (i.e., from nowhere ("everybody in Tibet knows about it!")).

Interesting question. I did a search to look for one, but all the crazy TM meditation sites and other junk made it difficult. Fortunately I did find one eventually:

http://www.noetic.org/ions/medbiblio/ch1.htm

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I agree.
I agree.
I agree.
I always have another comment.

EDIT: and I couldn't resist so here it is:
We have scientific evidence that we are not yet able to measure what constitutes an active consciousness. I think this is a reasonable take on the article cited. Anyone disagree?

Not me, I think its pretty obvious medical science is only beginning to gain a firm grasp of how the mind and brain work.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by heusdens
This is weird conclusion. You say that there is a possibility science could proof life after death, but science would be unable to proof the contrary. Now to proof something does not exist, is and can be very hard. But that itself contains no proof for the assume existence of something.

It is a fundamental truth that science can never prove that there is no post-life existence. At most, all that we can say is that no evidence exists, or that nothing known about consciousness suggests that there is an afterlife, or that the known measurable properties of consciousness are completely consistent with all observed properties of C. On the other hand, we might eventually develop a framework to actually address this question somehow...I have no idea how but it could be possible. Then something might be provable here. Or for that matter, God might come riding down on his fiery chariot. I am not saying this will happen, only that it could. This is why only the after lifer’s have any hope of ever winning this argument with proof.

Science can determine if brain cells are alive or dead. So there is absolutely no hope for explanations that claim that consciousness could still exist after the brain cells have died.
There isn't any more proof needed then that.

This statement is not consistent. You are using your assumption as proof.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by wuliheron
Not me, I think its pretty obvious medical science is only beginning to gain a firm grasp of how the mind and brain work.

Yes we are only beginning...in all likelihood. But this seems to contradict your lack of agreement about the article on coronary patients. I only assert that according to the evidence, we may not be able to measure what constitutes an active consciousness. How exactly is this assertion in conflict or not supported by the article?

 

[wuliheron]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Yes we are only beginning...in all likelihood. But this seems to contradict your lack of agreement about the article on coronary patients. I only assert that according to the evidence, we may not be able to measure what constitutes an active consciousness. How exactly is this assertion in conflict or not supported by the article?

Oh, it doesn't contradict our uncertainty over cognitive processes. It does bring the premise of near death experiences back into the realm of unsolved mysteries. What is emerging from study after study is that cognition research is steadily evolving and even how the cognitive and physical are related is still a mystery in profound ways.

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
It is a fundamental truth that science can never prove that there is no post-life existence.

And that is not what science even has to proof. The duty of proof lies on the other side, namely those that claim that there is a post-mortum life. They have to provide solid proof for such ridiculous nonsense statements, and not just provide arguments for the mere 'possibility'.
It is because of that kind of proof has never been given, these claims must be rejected.

This statement is not consistent. You are using your assumption as proof.

What assumption? Every or most part of consciousness have been brought back to material phenomena happening in the brain.
It is solid proof that out consciousness is seated there, and that consciousness is entirely and ultimately dependend on the functioning of living brain material. That is not an assumption, it is scientific evidence.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by heusdens
And that is not what science even has to proof. The duty of proof lies on the other side, namely those that claim that there is a post-mortum life. They have to provide solid proof for such ridiculous nonsense statements

In order to satisfy whom? I thought that scientists are supposed to do the science part.

and not just provide arguments for the mere 'possibility'.
It is because of that kind of proof has never been given, these claims must be rejected.

To argue for or against an after life is a faith argument. I am only saying that we don't know.

What assumption? Every or most part of consciousness have been brought back to material phenomena happening in the brain.
It is solid proof that out consciousness is seated there, and that consciousness is entirely and ultimately dependend on the functioning of living brain material. That is not an assumption, it is scientific evidence.

First you said it was proof and then evidence. You make my point! You are calling them the same thing. I can trace all of the mechanical actions in an automobile back to the crankshaft. If I don't know what causes the actions measured, and I can't think of a more fundamental test to perform, I can only infer that this may or may not be the end of the process. How can we say whether we are looking at the crankshaft or the driver? EDIT: And then we get into what drives the driver which is where this thread begins!

And back to the article. The rule of the day: If we can’t measure it, then for science at least the existence of something is useless or even meaningless. We presently define an active consciousness according to EEGs. This is primarily how we declare that someone is dead. Now it seems that dying patients can still be conscious with a flat-line EEG. So, since we have no other measure of consciousness other than awareness [which also does not qualify as a measurement] formally it would seem that science fails to see any connection between consciousness and the brain. Maybe we will find that given better equipment that allows for more accurate measurements of the brain’s activity, a lower level of brain activity will be detected, but maybe not. It is not the job of science to make assertions of truth based on guesses...no matter how obvious they may seem to some people. Our expectations are usually wrong when it comes to matters of existence.

 

[Iacchus32]

Vision of Marital Love

How would you classify the following experience? Would you say it was delusional, an outright lie (by a very clever liar) or, possibly the real thing? The man was a highly regarded scientist in his day, before turning theologian and, "mystic." He was also quite sane.


Heavenly vision of Marital Love by http://www.swedenborg.com/" ...

One morning I looked upward and saw above me successive heavenly spheres. Soon I heard a voice from above which said: "We have sensed and now see that you are meditating regarding marital love. As we are aware that no one on Earth knows what the origin and nature of marital love is, and it is important that it should be known, it has pleased the Lord that heaven be opened to you in order that illumination might flow into the interior of your mind. We shall now, as we are permitted, send down a married couple for you to observe."

Then a carriage appeared descending from the third or highest heaven. In it I saw one angel. As it approached I perceived two in it. At a distance the carriage glittered like a diamond and was drawn by a span of colts as white as snow. The occupants called to me, "Do you wish us to come closer? Then take care that the brilliance which surrounds us from our heaven does not strike you too strongly. Take what you see and hear according to your understanding and interpret it according to your mentality and insight!"

So they came and I recognized that they were husband and wife. And they said: "We are consorts and have lived happily in the heaven of the earliest of Earth's inhabitants continually from the golden age, into which you now see." I watched and became conscious of their symbolization of marital love, by their appearance, their garments and their jewelry; for all angels are human embodiments of love. Their dominant instincts shine from their faces and they adorn themselves accordingly. So they say in heaven: The affection of each one clothes him. The husband appeared to be of an age between youth and adulthood. The light of loving wisdom shone from his eyes. His whole face was one of shining comeliness. He wore an ankle-length robe of hyacinth blue. The appearance of the wife seemed to me even more lavish. The flaming light from her eyes dazzled me and I was dumbfounded.

When she observed this she asked, "What do you see?" I answered, "I see only marital love, but now I see it and then not!" She then turned obliquely from her husband and I could observe her better. Her eyes sparkled with the bright light of her heaven derived from the love of wisdom. Her hair was decked with a diadem of flowers. She wore a flowery red robe and a purple bodice fastened with rubies. The gems varied in shade as she glanced toward her husband. As she looked toward him the brilliance of her jewels was stronger and faded as she turned away. After I had observed her for a time, they spoke with each other. When the husband spoke he seemed to do so simultaneously from his wife and when she spoke she seemed to do so from her husband; such was the harmony of their thoughts. I sensed in their voices the tones of marital love arising from their joy in their state of peace and innocence. Finally they said: "We are recalled and must leave you." Then I watched them depart in their carriage, and as they neared their heaven they were met by young women who escorted them in.

From the booklet, Sex, Eros, Marital Love, available through the http://www.swedenborg.com/" I would also mention that there's plenty of information available on the matter if, one just cared to do the research.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
How would you classify the following experience? Would you say it was delusional, an outright lie (by a very clever liar) or, possibly the real thing? The man was a highly regarded scientist in his day, before turning theologian and, "mystic." He was also quite sane.

I would be afraid to draw any conclusions without knowing much more about it. My first impression is that he is a failed poet or writer - [Edit: ...trying to start a religion]. Next, perhaps he was a person with a highly active imagination who has intense dreams or something similar. I don't see how we can infer anything definite here. I sure wouldn't make any leaps of faith...but as always I remain open to greater possibilities. Why do you ask?

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
How would you classify the following experience? Would you say it was delusional, an outright lie (by a very clever liar) or, possibly the real thing? The man was a highly regarded scientist in his day, before turning theologian and, "mystic." He was also quite sane.

His story is what I would classify as a revelation, he felt something that only he could feel or explain and chose to ignore his scientific backround and chose to make this revelation a reality. I think it was a delusion, where did Heaven open up from? The clouds? We've been there, and there is no Heaven up there. Many people have wondered about this and many other more important things, and Heaven has never chosen to open up, at least been recorded. I would call this a delusion.

This so-called Heavenly knowledge of marital love is nothing new? Nothing was even said, one man with a large self-image thinks he is special and was given a vision from Heaven, we have heard this before.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I noticed a report about consciousness in my database. I am simply posting FYI - I don't know anything else about this.

Our Conscious Mind Could Be An Electromagnetic Field

 

[von_Bismarck]

It is more appropriate to say consciousness is produced by the brain. If a person 'feels' that his or her consciousness is localized in a specific area in the context of the senses, then that is because the sense receptors are localized in a specific area.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by von_Bismarck
It is more appropriate to say consciousness is produced by the brain. If a person 'feels' that his or her consciousness is localized in a specific area in the context of the senses, then that is because the sense receptors are localized in a specific area.

I agree. And yet, if I am correct in saying the brain doesn't feel anything, then that would mean the brain produces consciousness on a "subconscious level." In which case maybe it would be more like a doorway or a receiver, which receives infomation from both sides of "the corridor" (between the material and the spiritual).

 

[Iacchus32]

I died and gave birth to myself, and I don't even go to church. Of course I may just be delusional ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html