If science proves that non-local consciousness is real how does that change your understanding

[shunyadragon]

Please show where I described spiritual awareness as a belief. You have obviously not read many of my posts, I am forever explaining to whoever is interested in serious religious practice that reality is forever on the other side of conceptualization/belief. A belief, as with a concept, may be meant to represent reality, but it is not actually the reality, and never will be. To realize the religious state of non-duality, one must cease all thought, totally, then reality is actually present.

Spiritual Awareness by definition is a religious belief. It is not necessary for you to describe it as such for it to be a religious belief.

spiritual - Google Search

Spiritual means relating to the spirit or soul, or to sacred or religious matters. It can also mean relating to deep feelings and beliefs, or having a mind or emotions of a high quality.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Spiritual Awareness by definition is a religious belief. It is not necessary for you to describe it as such for it to be a religious belief.

spiritual - Google Search

Spiritual means relating to the spirit or soul, or to sacred or religious matters. It can also mean relating to deep feelings and beliefs, or having a mind or emotions of a high quality.

It may be your belief that it is a belief, that is because you have not given yourself to realize spiritual awareness. Same goes for all believers, beliefs are not reality, they represent some reality.

Belief is not reality, try to understand. Spiritual awareness is not a belief, but there are those who believe it exists, and those who believe it does not exist, meanwhile the true aspirant has realized the non-dual state of spiritual awareness, beyond words, beyond belief.

 

[sun rise]

I read over this reference and found the conclusions completely cited reflects the intent of the evaluation of the previous research, which in general inconclusive and in the need for more research and issues of methodology. Some results were statistically significant but the results were unpredictable.

I could not post the conclusions because they are locked, I will answer more on this reference.

That is in my judgement a very fair and accurate appraisal. It's why I used the word "IF" in the thread title.

 

[shunyadragon]

It may be your belief that it is a belief, that is because you have not given yourself to realize spiritual awareness. Same goes for all believers, beliefs are not reality, they represent some reality.

Belief is not reality, try to understand. Spiritual awareness is not a belief, but there are those who believe it exists, and those who believe it does not exist, meanwhile the true aspirant has realized the non-dual state of spiritual awareness, beyond words, beyond belief.

The claim of Spiritual Awareness is indeed a religious claim related to a degree of spiritual belief.

To add there is significant uncertainty and unanswered questions concerning the underlying nature of the reality of our physical existence, I support Quantum non-locality at the foundation.

I object to the concept of consciousness outside how it is defined concerning animals with a Central nervous system as it is defined, It appears that it is an attempt to subjectively define unknowns of the relationships between humans and our physical existence, and relationships between physical things.

Animal consciousness - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Animal consciousness, or animal awareness, is the quality or state of self-awareness within an animal, or of being aware of an external object or something within itself.[2][3] In humans, consciousness has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, qualia, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.[4] Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is.

Neural correlates of consciousness - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The neural correlates of consciousness (NCC) are the minimal set of neuronal events and mechanisms sufficient for the occurrence of the mental states to which they are related.[2] Neuroscientists use empirical approaches to discover neural correlates of subjective phenomena; that is, neural changes which necessarily and regularly correlate with a specific experience.[3][4] The set should be minimal because, under the materialist assumption that the brain is sufficient to give rise to any given conscious experience, the question is which of its components are necessary to produce it.

Any use of the concept of consciousness needs to come up with a specific definition other than the above. to describe a relationship between non-local aspects of the material world, There are beliefs like panpsychism:

panpsychism consciousness - Google Search

Panpsychism is the philosophical idea that consciousness is a fundamental aspect of reality, and not just limited to complex organisms:
Explanation
Panpsychism is derived from the Greek words pan ("all") and psyche ("soul" or "mind"). Panpsychists believe that consciousness is a fundamental feature of the physical universe, and that it is present in everything, at least to some degree.

If you define consciousness beyond the scientific understanding and definition panpsychism is the only viable conclusion for which there is no evidence other than a subjective belief without scientific evidence and definition.

What is the definition of consciousness beyond the scientific definition?

 

[Andrew Stephen]

To me and logic, the intelligence of creation is the consciousness that exist in the word that becomes flesh to become again.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Thanks I don’t mean to speak out a turn and apologies to all if this question was meant for someone else but thanks for reading to all.

To me and logic, the intelligence of creation is the consciousness that exist in the word that becomes flesh to become again.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[shunyadragon]

Peace to all,

Thanks I don’t mean to speak out a turn and apologies to all if this question was meant for someone else but thanks for reading to all.

To me and logic, the intelligence of creation is the consciousness that exist in the word that becomes flesh to become again.

Peace always,
Stephen

Again religious beliefs are not synonymous with logic One uses logic in this case to justify religious belief,

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The claim of Spiritual Awareness is indeed a religious claim related to a degree of spiritual belief.

To add there is significant uncertainty and unanswered questions concerning the underlying nature of the reality of our physical existence, I support Quantum non-locality at the foundation.

I object to the concept of consciousness outside how it is defined concerning animals with a Central nervous system as it is defined, It appears that it is an attempt to subjectively define unknowns of the relationships between humans and our physical existence, and relationships between physical things.

Animal consciousness - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Animal consciousness, or animal awareness, is the quality or state of self-awareness within an animal, or of being aware of an external object or something within itself.[2][3] In humans, consciousness has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, qualia, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.[4] Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is.

Neural correlates of consciousness - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The neural correlates of consciousness (NCC) are the minimal set of neuronal events and mechanisms sufficient for the occurrence of the mental states to which they are related.[2] Neuroscientists use empirical approaches to discover neural correlates of subjective phenomena; that is, neural changes which necessarily and regularly correlate with a specific experience.[3][4] The set should be minimal because, under the materialist assumption that the brain is sufficient to give rise to any given conscious experience, the question is which of its components are necessary to produce it.

Any use of the concept of consciousness needs to come up with a specific definition other than the above. to describe a relationship between non-local aspects of the material world, There are beliefs like panpsychism:

panpsychism consciousness - Google Search

Panpsychism is the philosophical idea that consciousness is a fundamental aspect of reality, and not just limited to complex organisms:
Explanation
Panpsychism is derived from the Greek words pan ("all") and psyche ("soul" or "mind"). Panpsychists believe that consciousness is a fundamental feature of the physical universe, and that it is present in everything, at least to some degree.

If you define consciousness beyond the scientific understanding and definition panpsychism is the only viable conclusion for which there is no evidence other than a subjective belief without scientific evidence and definition.

What is the definition of consciousness beyond the scientific definition?

All this blather from unenlightened souls about a reality they have not realized. There is no logic to it except perhaps some inherent sense of inferiority.

 

[shunyadragon]

All this blather from unenlightened souls about a reality they have not realized. There is no logic to it except perhaps some inherent sense of inferiority.

Nothing of substance in this response.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Nothing of substance in this respons

 

[shunyadragon]

I do not try to handle the truth.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Thanks Shunyadragon, I see the point in beliefs and logic not synonomous, and will take youe advise,
"Again religious beliefs are not synonymous with logic One uses logic in this case to justify religious belief,"
I will not use logic, and Iunderstand now, thank for the update, and good information.
Thanks again for your honest energy Shunyadragon

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What is the definition of consciousness beyond the scientific definition?

Any and all definitions of consciousness are meant to represent the reality represented by the concept of consciousness, but they are not, and never will be able to realize the reality represented by the name 'consciousness'. Cease all thought, and consciousness will be what is realized, not dualisticly via a definition, but directly in a state on non-duality.

 

[shunyadragon]

Any and all definitions of consciousness are meant to represent the reality represented by the concept of consciousness, but they are not, and never will be able to realize the reality represented by the name 'consciousness'. Cease all thought, and consciousness will be what is realized, not dualisticly via a definition, but directly in a state on non-duality.

"Dualistcily?!?!?! via a definition" your vaguely describing a definition that does not exist. "never will be able to realize the reality represented by the name 'consciousness'," very nebulous and confusing. Dualism versus non-duality would be adding another subjective religious concept to a definition you deny cannot be defined.

Not comprehend able response.

 

[shunyadragon]

Peace to all,

Thanks Shunyadragon, I see the point in beliefs and logic not synonomous, and will take youe advise,
"Again religious beliefs are not synonymous with logic One uses logic in this case to justify religious belief,"
I will not use logic, and Iunderstand now, thank for the update, and good information.
Thanks again for your honest energy Shunyadragon

Peace always,
Stephen

Everyone uses logic to justify their religious beliefs no problem, but the justification of belief by logic is not an effective argument for simply stating one's subjective religious beliefs.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

"Dualistcily?!?!?! via a definition" your vaguely describing a definition that does not exist. "never will be able to realize the reality represented by the name 'consciousness'," very nebulous and confusing. Dualism versus non-duality would be adding another subjective religious concept to a definition you deny cannot be defined.

Not comprehend able response.

Ok, when Jesus said "The Father and I are one", that is what non-duality means. It does not mean "I think the Father and I are one".

 

[shunyadragon]

Ok, when Jesus said "The Father and I are one", that is what non-duality means. It does not mean "I think the Father and I are one".

OK, this what you believe concerning the non-duality and nature of 'consciousness' , but again your presenting a deeper religious argument for what you believe concerning 'consciousness.'

 

[wellwisher]

The duality of mind; consciousness, and body is correct, but not how everyone thinks. This duality is connected to the water and the organics of life and the brain, with consciousness more on the water side. The organics are more like the scaffolding, that make this possible in the water, with the water making the scaffolding set up and evolve.

There are 100 times as many water molecules, as all the organic molecules combined, in any cell. A water molecule is small and all combined are like an army of ants, that are everywhere, touching all the organics, while also touching other water. They can work separately, but can also work like a colony for integrated effects.

Water forms hydrogen bonds, with each water molecule able to form up to four hydrogen bonds. This allows for a 3-D water matrix. Hydrogen bonding is the strongest secondary bonding force in life, with water the dominant player; army of ants that can overwhelm larger critters. Some of water's hydrogen bonds are with the organics, and some are with other water. Like army ants that can form ant bridges within and also between organic structures.

Each hydrogen bond of water is also like a little binary switch, that has two settings; polar and covalent. In the pH effect, the hydrogen can weakly or strongly bind with other water and even change partners. Based on the combinations of these binary switches near organic surfaces, and beyond, is like a finger print of the organic landscape both in part and in whole. The state of the water; army ants, reflects the state of the organic scaffolding both close and far based on water's reflected hydrogen bonding binary coding.

From an experimental POV, it is much easier to look at the naked DNA, then to be able to count DNA's water's binary switch settings. These switch settings are not static, since they are part of a dynamic system. Due to the greater ease of looking at the organics, we tend to know more about the scaffolding. However, that alone seems to lack something when we discuss consciousness. The organics are like a computer's hardware, but life and consciousness is not an automaton, but rather appear to also have software. This leads to speculation about a second unknown half of the puzzle to account for the software; from the outside, or from the water inside, etc,

Neurons expend 90% of their metabolic energy pumping and exchanging cations. This reduces the entropy of the ions, making them more ordered and even segregated. The hydrogen bonding switch settings are the perfect matrix to increase this entropy deficit, with the deficit like orders to the army ants, to push and pull the organic processes; software using the hardware via the 2nd law.

The binary switches, when in the covalent state have lower entropy, take up more space and have lower enthalpy, while the polar state of the switch has the opposite or higher entropy, takes up less space, and has higher enthalpy. These switches are not just for data, but also contain muscle. Surface tension of all the organic surfaces in water implies stretching, and is the covalent state of the switch. To increase the switch entropy; make it polar, means the surface tension becomes slack. Within the crowed liquid state, organics will change confirmation; tweaks.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

To me, my understanding is DNA is that mankind can never understand the intelligence of creation through the finite Disciplines of earth. Failed order in the first spirit of man consisting of choice which gives the freedom to choose to love or not to love in logic. But the new DNA is the intelligence of creation that will never fail and will not have the chance to not love with only has the power to love in the most love as the only state of selection.

To me in my understanding is creation is not unlike a great Parable of the story of understanding the Monostable, and Bistable Multivibrator. A Bistable multivibrator, will change, vibrate between one of two stable states and remain in the state of the last known good condition from choice through the intelligence for the condition. Creation will be in fulfilled order a monostable vibrator operating an only one condition and is the fulfilled logic in the intelligence of fulfilled creation follows the pattern only to love, and through the Faith of Abraham.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Ben Dhyan]

OK, this what you believe concerning the non-duality and nature of 'consciousness' , but again your presenting a deeper religious argument for what you believe concerning 'consciousness.'

It is not a belief, you just don't understand becaise you have never stilled your mind have you?

All you need to do is still your mind and the brain ego-self does not arise, when there is no brain-ego self consciousness arising in the mind, there is no mind duality, there is just pure awareness without self-awareness, ie., non-duality. The very moment that duality returns with the re-arising of the brain ego-self, the ego-self has access to the memory of the non-dual state experience and if yet a relative novice to dhyan meditation, it imagines itself to have experienced non-duality, which error will lead to much difficult karma for the aspirant.