• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Continuity of Consciousness

Penumbra

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Even the Atheist Sam Harris has wrote on this subject.
Speaking of Sam Harris, here is a clip of Sam Harris and Deepak Chopra, among others, discussing how altering the brain can alter a person's mind. Certain parts of it are relevant to this thread.

[youtube]QdT78uNJtYU[/youtube]
YouTube - The Nightline Face-Off: Does God Have a Future? (6 of 12)

(btw, for anyone interested, I find this whole atheist vs. theist debate to be better than average and worth watching. Rather than turning to an evolution debate or something like that, the theists in the debate are beyond such things and therefore the debate can focus on bigger things. Shermer makes useful points but is a bit annoying, and Harris is in my opinion extremely clear and worth listening to).
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Why do you call the Universe a being?

Namaste Yogi

I did not. I said that it is the being who has modelled the universe and not the other way around. It is the being who perceives and models. In Hindu scripture, universe, is however, called a divine purusha. But it is said in aitreya upanishad that atma (the Self) fashioned the Purusha from the waters (consciousness).

I hope this is somewhat clear?

Regards

...
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
Speaking of Sam Harris, here is a clip of Sam Harris and Deepak Chopra, among others, discussing how altering the brain can alter a person's mind.

Well, just to be clear Deepak's point that our world is created by our minds I find not to be a not realistic. I wonder why he is representing our side of this debate.

I think it is clear that brain chemistry creates changes a persons mind. But from my personal experience there is more to it then just that.

It also should be said that Sam Harris might have a differing view of the dualism of the mind but he still views mystical experience in a positive light.

Why Religion Must End: Interview with Sam Harris- Beliefnet.com
 
Last edited:

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
Namaste Yogi

I did not. I said that it is the being who has modelled the universe and not the other way around. It is the being who perceives and models. In Hindu scripture, universe, is however, called a divine purusha. But it is said in aitreya upanishad that atma (the Self) fashioned the Purusha from the waters (consciousness).

I hope this is somewhat clear?

Regards

...

Thanks I now understand your point.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
The example that PolyHedral provided is the same one that I commonly use, so he has said much of how I would have said in response to this. I'll still say it in my own words, I suppose.

Windows 7, or any software basically, is just a series of calculations performed by the hardware of the computer. The software is an emergent property of the computer, and only exists as long as the hardware remains in the correct organized manner. The same is true for computer memory- the saved information is saved in the form of organized hardware.

If a computer is smashed to bits, or if it overheats and burns itself, or if water is poured all over it and short circuits it, or if the computer simply becomes very aged and the connections falter, then the software will cease to work. If the computer is irrevocably damaged, the software doesn't "fly out", but rather simply ceases to exist. The software is a purely emergent property of the hardware and is dependent on a specific organization of the hardware. When that organization no longer exists, the software no longer exists. If the computer is irrevocably damaged, then it will be impossible to repair and the memory will be lost forever.

Consider as an example a jigsaw puzzle. When I put a jigsaw puzzle together, it will be a complete picture. If, however, I take the puzzle apart and even destroy the pieces, then the picture doesn't "fly out" anywhere. It simply ceases to exist because it was only existent when the pieces were existent and organized properly.

The brain can conceivably be considered the same unless some sort of soul can be shown to exist or if its necessity is proven. The mind exists because the brain is constantly performing work. If the brain is damaged to a certain extent, then it will be unable to perform the functions that lead to a mind and to consciousness/awareness. It can also be damaged to a point where it begins acting differently such that the personality changes.

In this way, the mind can be an emergent property of the brain, just like how Windows 7 is an emerges from the computer or how a picture emerges from a completed jigsaw puzzle. When the brain dies, the mind or the self doesn't necessarily fly out anywhere; it may just cease to exist because the parts that made it up cease to exist in the proper organized form.

Dear Penumbra

I understand this. Please consider the following.

As per PolyHedral and you, a mind is emergent proprty of one PC. You agree that some IBMers created it. That IBMer is another PC whose mind emerged. This PC (IBMer) was also result of another scientist (another PC).

It goes on and on -----.

It is like that only. It neither begins nor ends. Yet a common thread sustains this activity of PC giving rise to another PC.

...
 
Last edited:

atanu

Member
Premium Member
In this way, the mind can be an emergent property of the brain, just like how Windows 7 is an emerges from the computer or how a picture emerges from a completed jigsaw puzzle. When the brain dies, the mind or the self doesn't necessarily fly out anywhere; it may just cease to exist because the parts that made it up cease to exist in the proper organized form.

Hi

Mind is something symptomatic of inteligence.

To say that mind/intelligence emerges from a tissue is almost like a child saying from within a room that sun light emerges from window. Just as window when shut, does not kill sunlight, the dying of brain does nothing to the intelligence, which is immortal.

I hope .....

...
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
There is a body of neurophysiological data that some scientists believes support epiphenomenalism ( mental states are side-effects or by-products of matter) but not all.

Even the scientist Benjamin Libet who's studies are most often used to hit us "Dualist of the mind" over the head. Has said that he believes his subjects still have a "conscious veto" over the response of the mind. Think about that we have a conscious veto over the response of the brain. Some of you science folks are acting as if all the facts are in. Epiphenomenalism is not a given.
 
Last edited:

St Giordano Bruno

Well-Known Member
Dear Bruno

What you say is based on the premise "I am this body mind and there are other body minds in this world, which is separate from me and others".

Unfortunately, the eastern philosophies start with a different understanding of a single unbroken reality and a single unbroken mind sprouting (call it OM or Big Bang) from and dissolving in the unchanging substratum. In this view, the phenomena of dark era etc. are not separate from mind and me.

Most discussions in this thread stem from this difference of premise.

...

I can't believe any "mind" sprouted out at the moment of the of the Big Bang, instead I believe it is/was an emergent pattern that emerged out of a higher complexity well after the universe's transition into metallicity. So up until that point the universe was a totally non-sentient and unconscious entity with no living things within or even outside it for that matter to make it aware of its own existence.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I can't believe any "mind" sprouted out at the moment of the of the Big Bang, instead I believe it is/was an emergent pattern that emerged out of a higher complexity well after the universe's transition into metallicity. So up until that point the universe was a totally non-sentient and unconscious entity with no living things within or even outside it for that matter to make it aware of its own existence.

Hello Bruno

I agree about total absence of conscious entity since that is what scripture says. If you are interested you may read 'Nasadiya Sukta' of Rig Veda. Zenzero posted it somewhere.

...
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
But it doesn't make sense for abstract "intelligence" to exist independent of a medium. (For a rather loose value of the term "medium")
 

bhaktajan

Active Member
Mind is one of the 24 elements constituting the material Creation.

There is 'Pradhana' that is known as the dessolved (retracted/dessicated/unmanifested) state state of 'Unconsciousness' (Bhag Pur. 3.26.52).

Also, 'Pradhana' is the outer-most and last of ten exponetially thicker ['to the power of 10' for each concentric layer] coverings of the Brahmanda that enclose our cosmos.

Each Brahmanda emerges from the breathing of the Sleeping Maha-Vishnu's exhaled breath & bodily pores, and exist only for the time it takes for Maha-Vishnu to take his next inhale breath.

Each Brahmanda has a Brahma that is the engineer and progenitor of all species ---all undergo samsara etc until Brahma life time ends and then . . . Maha-Vishnu to take his next inhale breath.

Here are note from the Vedas which I composed myself as a 'quick-reference' sheet for the Yogis on the go:

2060d1236479339-24-elements-gita-bhagavatam-24-elements-per-gita-bhagavatam.jpg
 

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friend bhaktajan,

Kindly share whatever you have realised from all that chart you have copied.

Love & rgds
 

Frank Merton

Active Member
Thought Experiment Three:
I've seen some proponents of reincarnation say that when one dies, they are reincarnated in a new form. The new form probably won't have your memories, might be another gender and born in a totally different culture, and may or may not have remnants of your personality (people I talk to have had different notions about this last part). What makes this reincarnated version still "you", rather than a wholly separate being?
The answer is simple, it is not "you." It is a new person with a new set of genes and life experiences. Your memories are gone because, except for the ways your life may have altered the nature of your life spirit, all memory is stored in physical brain and therefore dies when you die.

(This last statement of course contradicts most Buddhist opinion, but I think the presence of conditions like Alzheimer's Disease demonstrates the real nature of most memory).

The idea of Samsara is not as an escape from mortality. It is a trap that our life spirit is stuck in, being reborn as new person after new person, rarely if ever making any progress, and even when making progress, having the inherent impermanence of anything sooner or later destroy it.
 
Top